Jump to content

Question(s) of the Day 01/12/2014


The Fish
 Share

Recommended Posts

Goal kicks should be taken from the side the ball ends up at. The rule change that was made so they can be taken from either side was supposed to speed things up but only works to slow the game down. It's an easy change to make.

I also think there should be some review process for yellow cards. As I understand it at the minute you can't appeal a yellow even if it's one that ends up being one of two and getting a player sent off. That's just plain idiotic to me.

Finally I think referees should have more power to discipline players swearing to them or other officials. It's incredible that players are allowd to disrespect the officials the way they do. You wouldn't get away with it on a Sunday morning yet nothing ever seems to be done other than once in a while like Shola's sending off against the bin dippers last season.

 

I realise these aren't major issues but they all get on me tits!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goal kicks should be taken from the side the ball ends up at. The rule change that was made so they can be taken from either side was supposed to speed things up but only works to slow the game down. It's an easy change to make.

I also think there should be some review process for yellow cards. As I understand it at the minute you can't appeal a yellow even if it's one that ends up being one of two and getting a player sent off. That's just plain idiotic to me.

Finally I think referees should have more power to discipline players swearing to them or other officials. It's incredible that players are allowd to disrespect the officials the way they do. You wouldn't get away with it on a Sunday morning yet nothing ever seems to be done other than once in a while like Shola's sending off against the bin dippers last season.

 

I realise these aren't major issues but they all get on me tits!

 

 

Great shout the last two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The offside rule needs work. The attacker is supposed to have the benefit of the doubt but its rare he gets it apart from the freak incidents where the officials completely miss it. The whole interfering with play things needs to be made clearer or gotten rid of altogether.

 

One review per manager per half. Thing technology is sufficiently advance now for this to happen without taking up too much time. It might actually save some also considering the fall out that usually takes place after a controversial decision, players having a go at each other, technical areas out of control, people being sent to the stands etc etc.

 

Retrospective bans for bad tackles and diving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The offside rule needs work. The attacker is supposed to have the benefit of the doubt but its rare he gets it apart from the freak incidents where the officials completely miss it. The whole interfering with play things needs to be made clearer or gotten rid of altogether.

 

One review per manager per half. Thing technology is sufficiently advance now for this to happen without taking up too much time. It might actually save some also considering the fall out that usually takes place after a controversial decision, players having a go at each other, technical areas out of control, people being sent to the stands etc etc.

 

Retrospective bans for bad tackles and diving.

I think that that attacker getting the benefit of the doubt thing isn't actually true. I don't think there is currently anything in the rules about anyone getting the benefit of the out. It's either onside or offside.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there needs to be too much changed in the game at the moment. I agree completely with the idea that referee's need more respect. It could be done very simply by annoucing a clamp down and actually implementing it. Something along the lines that the players involved in an incident and the team captains are the only ones allowed to address the referee and stronger punishments in light of any dissent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that that attacker getting the benefit of the doubt thing isn't actually true. I don't think there is currently anything in the rules about anyone getting the benefit of the out. It's either onside or offside.

 

Did a quick search and you're right as in its not explicitly stated but the rule now works towards the benefit of the forward, best explained here:

 

"But it was in 2005 that the most radical changes came, and the switch to a law that, 142 years after it was first formulated, at last seems to have got it right. First, it was clarified that a player is offside only if a part of his body with which he is legally able to play the ball is beyond the penultimate defender. That, realistically, is academic, for no linesman can make a snap judgment as to whether, say, it is upper arm or torso he can see protruding beyond the defender, but what the change did was to shift the benefit of any doubt yet further in favour of the forward."

 

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2010/apr/13/the-question-why-is-offside-law-genius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did a quick search and you're right as in its not explicitly stated but the rule now works towards the benefit of the forward, best explained here:

 

"But it was in 2005 that the most radical changes came, and the switch to a law that, 142 years after it was first formulated, at last seems to have got it right. First, it was clarified that a player is offside only if a part of his body with which he is legally able to play the ball is beyond the penultimate defender. That, realistically, is academic, for no linesman can make a snap judgment as to whether, say, it is upper arm or torso he can see protruding beyond the defender, but what the change did was to shift the benefit of any doubt yet further in favour of the forward."

 

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2010/apr/13/the-question-why-is-offside-law-genius

So they're saying there that because a linesman can't be expected to be able to judge whether it's a players arm or chest that's furthest forward he'll automatically give the benefit of doubt to the forward. I think it's reasonable to expect a linesman to see if a players arm is stuck out beyond his body like. Funnily enough, I've thought that in the last few seasons most of the decisions that linesmen have had to make like that, they get right. It's usually more clear cut ones that they get wrong. In those cases I'd be in favour of some sort of decision from a tv ref if a goal was scored that should have been offside. In those cases it would take seconds to get a decision made and the game would be stopped anyway so it wouldn't slow anything up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That body part rule is perpsterous. They tried to bring in a "clear daylight" guideline a few years back which for me is a lot better. If your leg is offside but the rest of you isn't the you're level ffs.

Edited by PaddockLad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye. Give them a review like in tennis or cricket.

 

Still think they could make that a bit clearer. There's a hell of a lot going on at times and its a lot to expect the linesman to consistently pick up on something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he was one yellow away from a one match ban at the start of the game on saturday it would make sense that he should get a two game ban (one for reaching five yellows and one for getting sent off).

The way the rule seems to work they don't count either card as a booking so he could make it to the cut off point and get away without any more cards or suspensions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

retrospective punishment for shirt pulling in box and diving. three game bans for simulation. six game bans for repeat offenders. that'd soon sort out the diving mincers and all the grabbing in the box and hopefully force defenders back into proper defending.

 

the offside rule to revert to previous law, where by you're offisde if any player is in an offside position. get rid of this active/interfering with play nonsense.

 

bring back tackles from behind!

 

the back pass rule is one they can keep mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather then ban them they could bring in some sort of course, similar to the speed awareness one when you get caught speeding a few times and have the course be designed and taught by Michael Owen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see referees explain themselves after the game.

 

I'd also like to see managers like Hughes and Wenger, forced to watch incidents where their players act like cunts, and then explain themselves.

 

Basically I want to drag naughty players, staff and officials through the town square so we can all lob rotten vegetables at their fucking heads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see referees explain themselves after the game.

 

I'd also like to see managers like Hughes and Wenger, forced to watch incidents where their players act like cunts, and then explain themselves.

 

Basically I want to drag naughty players, staff and officials through the town square so we can all lob rotten vegetables at their fucking heads.

 

 

Can we not lob frozen watermelons instead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.