Football 18/19

[kaosmark2]

17 minutes ago, eastynh said:

How much time do you reckon is wasted while players argue with the ref?

So book players more strictly for doing it.

[eastynh]

1 hour ago, kaosmark2 said:

So book players more strictly for doing it.

That wastes more time.

[kaosmark2]

22 minutes ago, eastynh said:

That wastes more time.

Only short term. Then they'll stop arguing.

Dissent is a bookable offence. If it starts getting enforced players will stop doing it.

[pink_triangle]

3 hours ago, eastynh said:

Stop the clock, no time wasted.

It's not just about the time wasted, it offers another way of killing the other teams momentum when you have a one goal lead heading to injury time.

[pink_triangle]

Does anyone remember when wolves were being talked up as fighting for 7th place?

[Gucci Piggy]

6 hours ago, eastynh said:

In as far as VAR goes. Just have a review system. Each team gets one review per game. You review an incident, the ref looks at it again either on big screen or by side of the pitch. At the end of the match he explains his decision for each review. 

One review stops teams taking the piss and they will only use it when they really think they are on end of the wrong decision. It will not cause the game held up for a significant time and with the ref explaining his actions, there is total transparency.

it is really not that difficult to implement.

Save our Jose.

How would that work, though? When can you review a decision that wasn't given? The next break in play? What if one team thinks they should have had a free kick/penalty and the ball doesn't go out of play for the next 5 minutes until the other team scores down the other end? Can you then appeal the decision from 5 minutes ago that wasn't given and then wipe out the last 5 minutes if the game if that decision gets overturned? I don't see how a review system could possibly be implemented in football.

Only way I see VAR working well is if there's a panel watching the game who tell the referee if he's made a big mistake and make him overturn it. So basically how it was used in the World Cup minus the stupid 50/50 ones where the ref goes over to watch a TV on the side of the pitch. If the panel don't think an obvious mistake has been made then let the game carry on.

[mjsell]

4 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

What incidents can and can't be reviewed? I hate the challenge idea, teams who had them would use to waste time at end of game.

I remember seeing/reading something with one of the ex prem refs - someone like Winter or Halsey. They were asked if they could change one rule what would it be, and answered no subs in the last 10 minutes because they are only ever used for time wasting. What's the difference to that?

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, mjsell said:

I remember seeing/reading something with one of the ex prem refs - someone like Winter or Halsey. They were asked if they could change one rule what would it be, and answered no subs in the last 10 minutes because they are only ever used for time wasting. What's the difference to that?

No difference, but the existence of one way for teams to waste time, shouldn't justify the inclusion of others.

The late sub rule is difficult. The vast majority of them are time wasting, however it's hard to justify changing a rule which will give teams a benefit when they injure an opponent. It's annoying, but I don't see an obvious way around it.

[TheGayTent]

On 11/24/2018 at 9:06 PM, ThomThomDrum said:

Rugby is not a start stop game and VAR is not a major issue that takes away from the sport

That’s opinion and not one I agree with 

[eFestivals]

19 hours ago, mjsell said:

Is there anything in football that could be used as a similar deterrent? Loss of a sub.. seems a bit weird. There's not really much else though. I guess in all other sports that use a challenge system they don't lose anything other than the challenge itself if wrong.

I wasn't talking about a challenge system, I was talking about all of it.

If anyone wants to kill football, make it as crap as other games.

VAR is bollocks. It's not football.

[mjsell]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

VAR is bollocks. It's not football.

Fair enough that that is your opinion and i understand why many people hold it. My opinion is thats a backwards mentality though. All sports evolve - its the way of life, should we go back to when there were no crossbars and goalkeepers could use there hands anywhere? 

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, mjsell said:

My opinion is thats a backwards mentality though. All sports evolve

Yours is the backwards mentality matey. Football is more than just the rules, it's how the game is played. 

And that includes the pace at which its played, without contrived interruptions while some overly anal arsehole checks the rule book.

But if you like the rule book so much, why not concentrate on the time-wasting rule instead of others?

[zahidf]

Mental scenes in South American football

 

[pink_triangle]

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Yours is the backwards mentality matey. Football is more than just the rules, it's how the game is played. 

And that includes the pace at which its played, without contrived interruptions while some overly anal arsehole checks the rule book.

But if you like the rule book so much, why not concentrate on the time-wasting rule instead of others?

For all the talk about how football should learn from these other sports. It shouldn't be forgotten that the likes of NFL, Rugby and tennis are not close in popularity to football. I think the popularity is down to simplicity and pace/flow. VAR makes the game less simple and slower!

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

For all the talk about how football should learn from these other sports. It shouldn't be forgotten that the likes of NFL, Rugby and tennis are not close in popularity to football. I think the popularity is down to simplicity and pace/flow. VAR makes the game less simple and slower!

This ^^^.  

[Comfy Bean]

12 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Yours is the backwards mentality matey. Football is more than just the rules, it's how the game is played. 

And that includes the pace at which its played, without contrived interruptions while some overly anal arsehole checks the rule book.

But if you like the rule book so much, why not concentrate on the time-wasting rule instead of others?

Not sure I agree here Neil. The rules are not always being applied properly. Human error is affecting the outcome of matches just as it always has. The difference being with the advancement in technology, millions watching at home and also in the ground know within seconds that a mistake has been made and the goal was offside, punched in, player dived etc.

How the game is played, as you put it, has quite recently been affected by the pass back rule, 3 subs, 3 points, the ball, changes to offside, play offs etc

Change will continue as money talks. Like all the other changes, if it’s done right it will work out fine. Resisting change feels more like the backward mentality. VAR is coming and the paying customer will see less results being affected by referees mistakes.

Obviously some of the recent trials have been a shambles but there have been plenty examples given above about how it can work in sport. 

Whats your view on the goal line cameras ?

[Comfy Bean]

On 11/25/2018 at 8:13 PM, pink_triangle said:

No difference, but the existence of one way for teams to waste time, shouldn't justify the inclusion of others.

The late sub rule is difficult. The vast majority of them are time wasting, however it's hard to justify changing a rule which will give teams a benefit when they injure an opponent. It's annoying, but I don't see an obvious way around it.

Do the refs not already add time for substitutions and also “stop the clock” for time wasting ?

[pink_triangle]

2 minutes ago, Comfy Bean said:

 

How the game is played, as you put it, has quite recently been affected by the pass back rule, 3 subs, 3 points, the ball, changes to offside, play offs etc

Change will continue as money talks. Like all the other changes, if it’s done right it will work out fine. Resisting change feels more like the backward mentality. VAR is coming and the paying customer will see less results being affected by referees mistakes.

 

I'm not sure those rule changes had the potential to make the game worse, VAR could encourage players to try and kick the ball at a defenders arm, that's not a skill I am keen to see perfected.

I think the paying customer will end up with a less interesting game. I would gladly sacrifice perfection for education.

[pink_triangle]

4 minutes ago, Comfy Bean said:

Do the refs not already add time for substitutions and also “stop the clock” for time wasting ?

They add time, although I'm not convinced the time they add makes up for the time wasted. To me it's not just the time, but the loss of momentum.

[Comfy Bean]

2 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

They add time, although I'm not convinced the time they add makes up for the time wasted. To me it's not just the time, but the loss of momentum.

The refs should be capable of adding the right amount of time surely and also book players for time wasting.  I’ve seen plenty booked for it over the years. The keeper atleast once this season.

[LJS]

16 minutes ago, Comfy Bean said:

Not sure I agree here Neil. The rules are not always being applied properly. Human error is affecting the outcome of matches just as it always has. The difference being with the advancement in technology, millions watching at home and also in the ground know within seconds that a mistake has been made and the goal was offside, punched in, player dived etc.

How the game is played, as you put it, has quite recently been affected by the pass back rule, 3 subs, 3 points, the ball, changes to offside, play offs etc

Change will continue as money talks. Like all the other changes, if it’s done right it will work out fine. Resisting change feels more like the backward mentality. VAR is coming and the paying customer will see less results being affected by referees mistakes.

Obviously some of the recent trials have been a shambles but there have been plenty examples given above about how it can work in sport. 

Whats your view on the goal line cameras ?

good points Comfy.

Other sports that have made it work - Cricket Rugby & Tennis spring to mind - make the replays & the decision part of the spectacle, so although it may hold the game up, it adds to rather than detracts from the entertainment. Football appears not to learnt that lesson yet.

According to Neil the attraction football "includes the pace at which its played, without contrived interruptions"

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40993250

At its best you are struggling to have the ball in play for 2 thirds of the time - and at its worst you are only just getting over 50%.

 

Edited November 26, 2018 by LJS

[Comfy Bean]

7 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I'm not sure those rule changes had the potential to make the game worse, VAR could encourage players to try and kick the ball at a defenders arm, that's not a skill I am keen to see perfected.

I think the paying customer will end up with a less interesting game. I would gladly sacrifice perfection for education.

I’ve seen you mention this deliberate kick off the arm thing already. Not convinced although the players I watch struggle to get it in the Big onion bag never mind this hit the arm business  :-)

Again are there not already rules in place around arm to ball, deliberate hand ball, natural position etc. ?

[pink_triangle]

11 minutes ago, LJS said:

 

According to Neil the attraction football "includes the pace at which its played, without contrived interruptions"

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40993250

At its best you are struggling to have the ball in play for 2 thirds of the time - and at its worst you are only just getting over 50%.

 

How does that compare with other sports? Look at cricket and tennis there are plenty of times in between points/deliveres.

[pink_triangle]

12 minutes ago, Comfy Bean said:

I’ve seen you mention this deliberate kick off the arm thing already. Not convinced although the players I watch struggle to get it in the Big onion bag never mind this hit the arm business ?

Again are there not already rules in place around arm to ball, deliberate hand ball, natural position etc. ?

I don't think either of us have to worry about VAR at the level we watch! There are rules about handball, but putting the play into slow motion completely distorts it.

[pink_triangle]

19 minutes ago, Comfy Bean said:

The refs should be capable of adding the right amount of time surely and also book players for time wasting.  I’ve seen plenty booked for it over the years. The keeper atleast once this season.

Of course and in many cases (particularly the keeper) it's worth taking the tactical yellow card. As I have said it's not necessarily just the time, but the opportunity to break the momentum at a particular time.