The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
Rlburnside said:
He was a wonderful footballer but not one I liked ,to much of a prima donna for me.

I remember him not giving his all for Chelsea at the end of his time playing there and was instrumental in the unrest at the club.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but you're remembering incorrectly.
His last season was actually one of his best, winning player of the month, goal of the month, playmaker of the year and Pfa fans player of the year awards.
 
Yorkhacker said:
Sorry, but you're remembering incorrectly.
His last season was actually one of his best, winning player of the month, goal of the month, playmaker of the year and Pfa fans player of the year awards.
Click to expand...

Yes sorry I got that part wrong, what I remember mostly the unrest he had with Mourinho and some Chelsea fans turned on him thinking it was the reason that helped get Mourinho the sack.
 
I mentioned a couple of weeks back I would like to see VAR scrapped and restarted from scratch.

After the( another) farce between Spurs and Liverpool Howard Webb has said
quote
I know that Ifab, in fact before this situation even happened, I knew that they were going to do a full review of the laws of the game relating to the use of VAR," .
I still think it will be a token gesture. It’s ok doing a full review but a lot of what is wrong with VAR will stay the same.
 
Norrin Radd said:
I would have Ben White in the England defence next time around. What his problem with GS is I don't know but he's definitely worth an England place
Click to expand...
I really get the impression it's the other players who don't like him. Last time he was there he was sent home in a bit of a cloud of mystery wasn't he? And there was another fall out in the City game the other day where he was having a pop at Grealish or vice versa. It might just be that he's a bit of a knob and no one likes him hence they're better off not having him around. Added to that, he's only played right back for the last year and we're very much good for right backs at the moment.
 
Tashyboy said:
I mentioned a couple of weeks back I would like to see VAR scrapped and restarted from scratch.

After the( another) farce between Spurs and Liverpool Howard Webb has said
quote
I know that Ifab, in fact before this situation even happened, I knew that they were going to do a full review of the laws of the game relating to the use of VAR," .
I still think it will be a token gesture. It’s ok doing a full review but a lot of what is wrong with VAR will stay the same.
Click to expand...
They need to use it much less than they do. Get back to the referee refereeing the game. Let the ref ask if he wants a check - and only intervene if he's made an absolute howler, by which I mean a goal wrongly disallowed, or a blatant red card missed. Stop tying their hands by saying they can't review certain things or can't bring the game back once it's restarted, just let them intervene if it's the right thing to do. But the refs are using it as a crutch now, like it doesn't matter when decision they make because it will be checked anyway.
 
Orikoru said:
They need to use it much less than they do. Get back to the referee refereeing the game. Let the ref ask if he wants a check - and only intervene if he's made an absolute howler, by which I mean a goal wrongly disallowed, or a blatant red card missed. Stop tying their hands by saying they can't review certain things or can't bring the game back once it's restarted, just let them intervene if it's the right thing to do. But the refs are using it as a crutch now, like it doesn't matter when decision they make because it will be checked anyway.
Click to expand...
There appear to be a lot of contradictions in what you are saying.

When VAR intervenes, in their subjective view, they are doing so because they absolutely think the ref has missed something. So, if they notify the ref about a red card incident, it is because VAR thinks it is a red card. And, just remember, there is just the same controversy when VAR chooses NOT to intervene in certain instances.

But, how can you say in one sentence "they need to use it much less than they do" and then say "stop tying their hands by saying they can't review certain things"

And the danger of putting the responsibility on the onfield ref on whether he reviews VAR or not is simple. Why would he review something if, in his mind, he made the right decision? How does he know what he hasn't seen? You'd either get referees who review nothing because they back their instinctive decision, or referees who review everything, as they even doubt some of their most basic decisions (because very occasionally, what seems to be a basic decision actually turns out to be completely wrong from another angle)
 
Well, on the radio this morning they thought it would be the best idea to have the VAR Ref, an ex pro and and ex manager all in the VAR room to make decision :rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Swango1980 said:
They need to do it, as a social experiment. Get Paul Merson in, watch him make an absolute dog's dinner of it :)
Click to expand...

It could make a fascinating Big Brother style show.

Actually, as an experiment, I would love to see them try it on the replay of a match. Lets see if they can spot everything and made decisions all within a few seconds.
 
Swango1980 said:
There appear to be a lot of contradictions in what you are saying.

When VAR intervenes, in their subjective view, they are doing so because they absolutely think the ref has missed something. So, if they notify the ref about a red card incident, it is because VAR thinks it is a red card. And, just remember, there is just the same controversy when VAR chooses NOT to intervene in certain instances.

But, how can you say in one sentence "they need to use it much less than they do" and then say "stop tying their hands by saying they can't review certain things"

And the danger of putting the responsibility on the onfield ref on whether he reviews VAR or not is simple. Why would he review something if, in his mind, he made the right decision? How does he know what he hasn't seen? You'd either get referees who review nothing because they back their instinctive decision, or referees who review everything, as they even doubt some of their most basic decisions (because very occasionally, what seems to be a basic decision actually turns out to be completely wrong from another angle)
Click to expand...
The balance is all wrong. They say they review 'clear and obvious errors' but they end up reviewing everything. Only review goals and potential red cards incidents, plus anything the ref has specifically requested to review. Instead of that they have made some attempt to reduce what they review by making arbitrary rules for themselves, such as we can't review yellow cards and so on. Scrap all those daft rules and just let the ref decide what he wants reviewed. Unless it's a game-changing incident as I said (goals, red cards).

Refs are still going to miss small things, like an innocuous foul or giving a throw-in the wrong way. It's already been proven that even with VAR incorrect decisions are made, so we need to accept that.
 
GB72 said:
It could make a fascinating Big Brother style show.

Actually, as an experiment, I would love to see them try it on the replay of a match. Lets see if they can spot everything and made decisions all within a few seconds.
Click to expand...
Just do it on the Charity Shield game each year. Would finally give us a reason to actually watch it. (y)
 
Orikoru said:
The balance is all wrong. They say they review 'clear and obvious errors' but they end up reviewing everything. Only review goals and potential red cards incidents, plus anything the ref has specifically requested to review. Instead of that they have made some attempt to reduce what they review by making arbitrary rules for themselves, such as we can't review yellow cards and so on. Scrap all those daft rules and just let the ref decide what he wants reviewed. Unless it's a game-changing incident as I said (goals, red cards).

Refs are still going to miss small things, like an innocuous foul or giving a throw-in the wrong way. It's already been proven that even with VAR incorrect decisions are made, so we need to accept that.
Click to expand...
And if it takes more than 2 views at different angles , it was not clear and obvious
 
Orikoru said:
The balance is all wrong. They say they review 'clear and obvious errors' but they end up reviewing everything. Only review goals and potential red cards incidents, plus anything the ref has specifically requested to review. Instead of that they have made some attempt to reduce what they review by making arbitrary rules for themselves, such as we can't review yellow cards and so on. Scrap all those daft rules and just let the ref decide what he wants reviewed. Unless it's a game-changing incident as I said (goals, red cards).

Refs are still going to miss small things, like an innocuous foul or giving a throw-in the wrong way. It's already been proven that even with VAR incorrect decisions are made, so we need to accept that.
Click to expand...
But again, there seems to be a contradiction in what you are asking.

From what I've seem, that is pretty much exactly what they do (bit in bold). They review goals (e.g. offside, and fouls leading to a goal, including handball). And they review red card incidents (either missed, or harshly given). They don't review anything else to my knowledge. They do not review corners, goal kicks, throw ins, free kicks, etc. You then go on to ask them to review yellow card incidents as well. You can't ask for them to be less involved, yet ask them to get involved in incidents that already do not get involved in. There is enough controversy when they get involved in red cards, due to subjectivity. Yet straight red card incidents are generally less subjective and less frequent than yellow card incidents. So if VAR got involved in every yellow card given or not given, it would be absolute carnage.

And as I said before, putting the responsibility on the onfield referee is extremely flawed, as they do not know what they have not seen. So, you'd end up with massive inconsistencies from one game to the next, simply depending on the confidence, or lack thereof, of the individual referee. And, I'm sure they would be easily swayed to review something if a big home crowd is demanding it, but maybe less likely if it is going to benefit the away team. After all, they are still human, so it takes bravery to not review an incident when 50,000 people are screaming for it. And it takes bravery to review an incident if you know 50,000 people will be yelling obscenities at you for even daring to go against their team.
 
Swango1980 said:
But again, there seems to be a contradiction in what you are asking.

From what I've seem, that is pretty much exactly what they do (bit in bold). They review goals (e.g. offside, and fouls leading to a goal, including handball). And they review red card incidents (either missed, or harshly given). They don't review anything else to my knowledge. They do not review corners, goal kicks, throw ins, free kicks, etc. You then go on to ask them to review yellow card incidents as well. You can't ask for them to be less involved, yet ask them to get involved in incidents that already do not get involved in. There is enough controversy when they get involved in red cards, due to subjectivity. Yet straight red card incidents are generally less subjective and less frequent than yellow card incidents. So if VAR got involved in every yellow card given or not given, it would be absolute carnage.

And as I said before, putting the responsibility on the onfield referee is extremely flawed, as they do not know what they have not seen. So, you'd end up with massive inconsistencies from one game to the next, simply depending on the confidence, or lack thereof, of the individual referee. And, I'm sure they would be easily swayed to review something if a big home crowd is demanding it, but maybe less likely if it is going to benefit the away team. After all, they are still human, so it takes bravery to not review an incident when 50,000 people are screaming for it. And it takes bravery to review an incident if you know 50,000 people will be yelling obscenities at you for even daring to go against their team.
Click to expand...
No there isn't.

I didn't say I want them to review all the yellow cards.
 
Swango1980 said:
But again, there seems to be a contradiction in what you are asking.

From what I've seem, that is pretty much exactly what they do (bit in bold). They review goals (e.g. offside, and fouls leading to a goal, including handball). And they review red card incidents (either missed, or harshly given). They don't review anything else to my knowledge. They do not review corners, goal kicks, throw ins, free kicks, etc. You then go on to ask them to review yellow card incidents as well. You can't ask for them to be less involved, yet ask them to get involved in incidents that already do not get involved in. There is enough controversy when they get involved in red cards, due to subjectivity. Yet straight red card incidents are generally less subjective and less frequent than yellow card incidents. So if VAR got involved in every yellow card given or not given, it would be absolute carnage.

And as I said before, putting the responsibility on the onfield referee is extremely flawed, as they do not know what they have not seen. So, you'd end up with massive inconsistencies from one game to the next, simply depending on the confidence, or lack thereof, of the individual referee. And, I'm sure they would be easily swayed to review something if a big home crowd is demanding it, but maybe less likely if it is going to benefit the away team. After all, they are still human, so it takes bravery to not review an incident when 50,000 people are screaming for it. And it takes bravery to review an incident if you know 50,000 people will be yelling obscenities at you for even daring to go against their team.
Click to expand...

The corner and throw in thing annoys me to be honest. In the grounds you can clearly see its a mistake at times but they don't get overturned. Yet to see one personally that leads to a goal but if it did it would feel pretty contentious to me that it wasn't checked back to that refereeing decision.
 
Orikoru said:
I really get the impression it's the other players who don't like him. Last time he was there he was sent home in a bit of a cloud of mystery wasn't he? And there was another fall out in the City game the other day where he was having a pop at Grealish or vice versa. It might just be that he's a bit of a knob and no one likes him hence they're better off not having him around. Added to that, he's only played right back for the last year and we're very much good for right backs at the moment.
Click to expand...

tell me youre a Spurs fan without telling me youre a Spurs fan lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hobbit
Another footie thread
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
WorldHandicapSystem
W
road2ruin
Fantasy Footie 25/26
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
3K
road2ruin
road2ruin
C
Weather apps
2
Replies
20
Views
406
jim8flog
jim8flog
SwingsitlikeHogan
Rental Rights Act
2
Replies
24
Views
1K
jim8flog
jim8flog
jim8flog
Golf or football
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
Voyager EMH
Voyager EMH
Top