|
|
On January 20 2017 18:00 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 16:31 WillyWanker wrote:On January 20 2017 09:33 Liquid`Drone wrote:On January 20 2017 05:00 Rebs wrote:On January 20 2017 02:41 Liquid`Drone wrote: But the randomness of football is such a big part of why it's the number one spectator sport. Pep's Barcelona being so good at controlling the game that they partially succeeded in removing randomness lead to people (myself included) thinking that watching them was boring. Penalty shootouts are less random than Liverpool losing 0-2 vs Burnley despite having 80-20 possession and 26-3 shots in their favor. Whenever a team won a game with one goal and the other had a shot in the post, the result had significant random factor to it. (If you wanna argue that it doesn't then penalty shootouts don't, either.)
I mean, not really arguing against you, I know you're just explaining a pov, but I just think that randomness is actually pretty awesome. If you look at a sport like handball, where there are so many more situations that the inherent randomness largely evens itself out, you almost never get upsets, and the possibility of upsets is a requirement for excitement.
While thats true the idea behind a league system is that it attempts to eliminate randomness. Thats what I like about a leagues. If you have the most points after 38 weeks or whatever, no one can argue that you were not the best team that year. So yes randomness within the individual games is great, but it would suck if teams were winning leagues randomly. Thats why sometimes the CL or Euro or WC winner (or even a team placing really well) makes you go "meh" because the knockout and any given Sunday element is more prevalent. I think the problem people have with pens is that the element of randomness is basically at its peak in that scenario. Yes Liverpool losing the sort of game you described is also random but its just one data point so it can get covered by extended periods of success. But the thing with pens is they are normally resorted in scenarios where you are doing it "for all the marbles" so to speak. Thats where the heightened scrutiny comes from. Im ok with it. I cant think of a better idea, and all other ideas are convoluted as fuck. Yeah I basically think that as long as we want a knockout format we just need to accept some randomness. Club football is the highest level, and then the best teams are rewarded through winning the leagues and consistently performing well in the CL, then EC/WC is the most entertaining but it doesn't necessarily display the best football or end up with the worthiest winner. I'm okay with this. CL is just as unpredictable as EC/WC. The two legs format makes it a bit more rewarding for the better teams, but you can still draw the toughest opponents round after round. I'm okay with it too, I would just change two things: no "2 clubs from the same country can't face each other" for the ro16; and full draw from the group phase (including knockout phase), like the EC/WC. I don't really have a valid reason for the 2nd one, just that it doesn't feel right currently. Even the Copa del Rey is like this now, while a few years ago you had the whole draw from the ro16. I like imagining future match-ups, and I feel like it's better to say "Madrid got Napoli because Chelsea fucked up the previous round" rather than "Madrid got lucky with Napoli again, ugh". Just as unpredictable? We've had a Bayern, Real Madrid, Barcelona semi finals a couple of times in a row. I actually find that pretty boring :/. The format, I meant. Obviously, these teams are so much stronger (money & squad) than the rest that they reach the last 4 more often. The WC/EC would be the same if it was played every year, but with 4 years between 2 competitions, there's more time for teams to catch up/get weaker. And we get it less often, so we're more excited about some teams' performances.
As for the Napoli thing, it was just an example, and I don't think Madrid did it on purpose this time. The red cards were pretty obvious but not this time.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51354 Posts
The new world cup causing all this is even more reason why it might as well be the worst idea ever if it has to fundamentally re change the whole game, something Gianni the president said would not happen. So nice lie to us already that eh?
Extra time is fine and needed, some epic moments produced in Extra time, Real Madrid champions league La Decima run springs to mind when they went super sayian. England vs Portugal in Euro 2004 which had i think was 2 goals for each time or at least 1 each.
I am in the camp, changes should only benefit the game substantially aka, video ref, goal line technology and not being able to pass the ball to the keeper and him pick the ball up! Not rules like no extra time, or timed penalty shoot outs, or an orange card for tactical foul etc. They don't improve the game like video ref or goal line technology do, they if anything add more confusion and drastically change the game we have and love.
|
If you love tactical fouls being a cornerstone of modern football, thats your things. But lets not pretend you want to keep any traditional values here.
And do you even know what "timed penalty shootouts" means? Or are you just pulling a typical pande yet again?
|
OK. Misunderstood extra time. Extra time is far better than penalty shootouts. At least you're still playing the same game.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51354 Posts
What does not knowing what it is have anything to do with it. It isn't a penalty shootout that we have now, it is a change and there is no need for a change to penalty shoot outs i have been pretty clear on that point through the subject. There is nothing wrong with penalty shoot outs, if after 120 minutes you can't beat eachother there is nothing wrong with that. People saying teams will "try" for penalty shoot outs, well good luck to them, if they can get to 120 minutes all even and then try and win a penalty shoot out for "training" for it, so be it. That ain't never gonna happen though is it lets be honest!
Tactical fouls are in the game now, they are punished with a red card that is what the rule states now. If a ref does not give a red card for a tactical foul then that is human error. If a ref "knew" he could give a 10 min sin bin instead, then every tactical foul will get a 10 min sin bin which isn't enough punishment for someone who is deliberately stopping an opponent scoring. This changes the game tenfold and will result in 10x more tactical fouls. That will make the game more negative for many teams who just play to win and not a playstyle like Barcelona for example.
I like football how it is now, its great, perfect if anything. What i can say isn't perfect is the human error aspect which needs addressing. Referee's need help, linesman are confused with Offside rule maybe or at least need help too. In fairness there isn't anything saying the game could not have a tv system based solely around making sure offside calls are done properly. These are the things to improve the game, where every decision made is correct on the rules stated in the game.
You can't honestly say these changes Van Basted has stated and suggested in that bullet point will "improve" the game?
|
On January 20 2017 19:27 Pandemona wrote:These are the things to improve the game, where every decision made is correct on the rules stated in the game.
Is it great though? I like drama, "karma strikes back", etc... Just half-kidding.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51354 Posts
Yeah i can understand that. I know when you don't get a good decision one game it eventually balances out, i mentioned that for a long time during one season might have been last season. However there is technology to make that not even be an issue anymore. Where if a player should have got a red card he would have. If a goal should have been offside it will be etc.
|
Mimimi... i have no cluw what (and why...) is to be changed but change is bad mimimi. Tactical fouls are supposed to be given a red card.
The daily football thread with pande...
And yes, i believe van basten ideas are certainly deserving consideration. In fact of his 8 point program i see only one I strongly disagree with. (The quarter idea) Two points I strongly agree with (team captains and time wasting) And the remaining I have either not seen in practice yet(like new penalties and offside) or I believe they should only be used for WC groupstage (extra time). Youth changes i dont care, this only touches the continental youth level anyway. Below local federations do what they want anyway.
Forgot the 8th point... whatever... still overall I think it worth discussing.
|
On January 20 2017 18:46 Pandemona wrote: True can't say it is a bad idea without seeing what it would be like now. But isn't there a debate for just changing offside rule again or just clarifying it to be easier?
Offside - You are offside if you are ahead of the last defending by ANY part of your body when the ball is played, whether you are near the ball or not.
Just a flat rule like that so no interfering with goal keeper view or "not being active" etcetc? Linesman then just flag all the time or something i don't know. However the rule now is like 15 mini rules and stuff.
Offside rule is something that clearly needs to be changed or clarified.
Just to give you an example that's been discussed to oblivion this week on the Portuguese Media.
Benfica suffered a goal this weekend vs Boavista that you can find below:
The guy that ends up to score the goal doesn't touch the ball after the first pass.
Should this be ruled offside?
The rule, as it is right now, just promotes pointless discussions one after the other.
|
On January 20 2017 20:00 bObaZ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 18:46 Pandemona wrote: True can't say it is a bad idea without seeing what it would be like now. But isn't there a debate for just changing offside rule again or just clarifying it to be easier?
Offside - You are offside if you are ahead of the last defending by ANY part of your body when the ball is played, whether you are near the ball or not.
Just a flat rule like that so no interfering with goal keeper view or "not being active" etcetc? Linesman then just flag all the time or something i don't know. However the rule now is like 15 mini rules and stuff. Offside rule is something that clearly needs to be changed or clarified. Just to give you an example that's been discussed to oblivion this week on the Portuguese Media. Benfica suffered a goal this weekend vs Boavista that you can find below: The guy that ends up to score the goal doesn't touch the ball after the first pass. Should this be ruled offside? + Show Spoiler +The rule, as it is right now, just promotes pointless discussions one after the other. Yes it should be ruled offside because he tries to play the ball and the goalkeeper can't ignore it because he cannot rely on the linesman. Most pointless discussions I have seen about offside situations are exactly the same as with handballs and penalty calls, understandable and reasonable decisions but irrational fans do not want to admit that their team did not get wronged.
|
No offside? Why we just don't play 5a sides from now on.
|
Just for reference, this wasn't ruled offside.
The majority of Referees and Ex-Referees are saying that this should have been an offside, but you still have some ex-referees that say that since the goalkeeper is in the line and there's no defender close to the ball this shouldn't be an offside.
If after the video, and with a clear intention of the player to try to touch the ball, and you still divide opinions, that clearly says that the video referee won't solve the issue.
You really need to change some rules regarding penaltys and offsides...
|
On January 20 2017 20:42 bObaZ wrote: Just for reference, this wasn't ruled offside.
The majority of Referees and Ex-Referees are saying that this should have been an offside, but you still have some ex-referees that say that since the goalkeeper is in the line and there's no defender close to the ball this shouldn't be an offside.
If after the video, and with a clear intention of the player to try to touch the ball, and you still divide opinions, that clearly says that the video referee won't solve the issue.
You really need to change some rules regarding penaltys and offsides... But change them to what? How can you make this more clear without simplifying and making it worse? Current rule from Fifa laws:
Active play: • Interfering with play • Interfering with an opponent • Gaining advantage Fairly obvious that the player in your example interfered with the play. I remember a situation from Bundesliga from one of the last seasons. There was an own goal, because a defender had to try to clear the ball that was passed to a player in an offside position. Since this player did not get close to the ball Markus Merk argued that this was not offside because he was not active. He clearly was, sometimes people that should know better are just wrong.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51354 Posts
On January 20 2017 19:51 mahrgell wrote: Mimimi... i have no cluw what (and why...) is to be changed but change is bad mimimi. Tactical fouls are supposed to be given a red card.
The daily football thread with pande...
And yes, i believe van basten ideas are certainly deserving consideration. In fact of his 8 point program i see only one I strongly disagree with. (The quarter idea) Two points I strongly agree with (team captains and time wasting) And the remaining I have either not seen in practice yet(like new penalties and offside) or I believe they should only be used for WC groupstage (extra time). Youth changes i dont care, this only touches the continental youth level anyway. Below local federations do what they want anyway.
Forgot the 8th point... whatever... still overall I think it worth discussing.
So me defending the game as it is wrong/bad? I don't get what your trying to say. All you have said is the great van basten rules/changes should be given time to be tested and trailed as they are in theory very good. Yet you yourself do not even know what he means by a "timed" penalty shoot out idea and my defending the original penalty shoot out system as it is is bad. I can't see how it could be improved by placing a "timed" theme around it. What can he theoretically do with a "timed" penalty shoot out, make it take less than 30 seconds to take your spot kick? Give a team 60 seconds to take all there penalties or something daft. On that note a penalty shoot out is very quick on the TV, by time said team taken first penalty and we have seen a replay, the next player is lining up his kick, that's pretty good from a TV perspective no?
The time wasting point is something EVERYONE goes mad about but everyone's team does it. Whether they are playing a short corner and keeping in there in the last 5-10 minutes or taking an extra 4 seconds on a goal kick. Every team does it, whether you are Barcelona or Schalke etc. Im pretty sure a rule was introduced or atleast they tried to say somewhere in some domestic leagues that only a captain can talk to the referee. Maybe it is in England where they are trying that or it was that only the Captain can question a decision. But it doesn't get enforced by the referee's they sometimes let some slide as they know a human reacts negatively when things don't go there way.
Exactly like what you are doing, i'm not agreeing with your views on the great Van Basten new 8 point revolution to improve the game so your responding with petty insults to justify your points. To be clear as well i did say what needs to be changed to improve the game and that was more technology to help officials, the game itself the football is more than fine imo and i can't see anyone complaining week in week out that the game is "boring" to watch or "omg penaltys so shit wish we could do 25m run at the keeper" lol. Or "extra time is so bad" thats why these changes he is proposing are left field as hell
On January 20 2017 20:49 sneirac wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 20:42 bObaZ wrote: Just for reference, this wasn't ruled offside.
The majority of Referees and Ex-Referees are saying that this should have been an offside, but you still have some ex-referees that say that since the goalkeeper is in the line and there's no defender close to the ball this shouldn't be an offside.
If after the video, and with a clear intention of the player to try to touch the ball, and you still divide opinions, that clearly says that the video referee won't solve the issue.
You really need to change some rules regarding penaltys and offsides... But change them to what? How can you make this more clear without simplifying and making it worse? Current rule from Fifa laws: Show nested quote +Active play: • Interfering with play • Interfering with an opponent • Gaining advantage Fairly obvious that the player in your example interfered with the play. I remember a situation from Bundesliga from one of the last seasons. There was an own goal, because a defender had to try to clear the ball that was passed to a player in an offside position. Since this player did not get close to the ball Markus Merk argued that this was not offside because he was not active. He clearly was, sometimes people that should know better are just wrong. That's why i suggest you just make it any player no matter if active or attempting the ball or not is offside if any part of him is beyond the last defender. That makes it black or white no? That would be the rule change to simplify it imo.
|
On January 20 2017 20:55 Pandemona wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 19:51 mahrgell wrote: Mimimi... i have no cluw what (and why...) is to be changed but change is bad mimimi. Tactical fouls are supposed to be given a red card.
The daily football thread with pande...
And yes, i believe van basten ideas are certainly deserving consideration. In fact of his 8 point program i see only one I strongly disagree with. (The quarter idea) Two points I strongly agree with (team captains and time wasting) And the remaining I have either not seen in practice yet(like new penalties and offside) or I believe they should only be used for WC groupstage (extra time). Youth changes i dont care, this only touches the continental youth level anyway. Below local federations do what they want anyway.
Forgot the 8th point... whatever... still overall I think it worth discussing.
So me defending the game as it is wrong/bad? I don't get what your trying to say. All you have said is the great van basten rules/changes should be given time to be tested and trailed as they are in theory very good. Yet you yourself do not even know what he means by a "timed" penalty shoot out idea and my defending the original penalty shoot out system as it is is bad. I can't see how it could be improved by placing a "timed" theme around it. What can he theoretically do with a "timed" penalty shoot out, make it take less than 30 seconds to take your spot kick? Give a team 60 seconds to take all there penalties or something daft. On that note a penalty shoot out is very quick on the TV, by time said team taken first penalty and we have seen a replay, the next player is lining up his kick, that's pretty good from a TV perspective no? The time wasting point is something EVERYONE goes mad about but everyone's team does it. Whether they are playing a short corner and keeping in there in the last 5-10 minutes or taking an extra 4 seconds on a goal kick. Every team does it, whether you are Barcelona or Schalke etc. Im pretty sure a rule was introduced or atleast they tried to say somewhere in some domestic leagues that only a captain can talk to the referee. Maybe it is in England where they are trying that or it was that only the Captain can question a decision. But it doesn't get enforced by the referee's they sometimes let some slide as they know a human reacts negatively when things don't go there way. Exactly like what you are doing, i'm not agreeing with your views on the great Van Basten new 8 point revolution to improve the game so your responding with petty insults to justify your points. To be clear as well i did say what needs to be changed to improve the game and that was more technology to help officials, the game itself the football is more than fine imo and i can't see anyone complaining week in week out that the game is "boring" to watch or "omg penaltys so shit wish we could do 25m run at the keeper" lol. Or "extra time is so bad" thats why these changes he is proposing are left field as hell Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 20:49 sneirac wrote:On January 20 2017 20:42 bObaZ wrote: Just for reference, this wasn't ruled offside.
The majority of Referees and Ex-Referees are saying that this should have been an offside, but you still have some ex-referees that say that since the goalkeeper is in the line and there's no defender close to the ball this shouldn't be an offside.
If after the video, and with a clear intention of the player to try to touch the ball, and you still divide opinions, that clearly says that the video referee won't solve the issue.
You really need to change some rules regarding penaltys and offsides... But change them to what? How can you make this more clear without simplifying and making it worse? Current rule from Fifa laws: Active play: • Interfering with play • Interfering with an opponent • Gaining advantage Fairly obvious that the player in your example interfered with the play. I remember a situation from Bundesliga from one of the last seasons. There was an own goal, because a defender had to try to clear the ball that was passed to a player in an offside position. Since this player did not get close to the ball Markus Merk argued that this was not offside because he was not active. He clearly was, sometimes people that should know better are just wrong. That's why i suggest you just make it any player no matter if active or attempting the ball or not is offside if any part of him is beyond the last defender. That makes it black or white no? That would be the rule change to simplify it imo. Huh? So if there is a player at the corner flag 40m away from the action you want play to be stopped for offside? Also to clarify, timed penalty shootouts are what was brought up few pages ago. Instead of a kick from 11 meters out the ball is placed 25 meters out and the player has 8 seconds to score.
|
|
On January 20 2017 21:13 Pandemona wrote:So that timed penalty shoot out is that discussion ok. That is interesting but was done in the MLS who now use the regular penalty shoot out which says? Yeah what is he doing 40m in the corner flag anyway! Again that makes the rule black and white though if not a trailing of how a game works with no offsides at all causes havoc on things like set pieces etc but again why are these changes being made there isn't a problem that technology can't help fix. If the problem is that the incorrect decisions are what causes people to question the rules. I just hate that these major drastic changes being thought up and proposed without the addressing of lack of technology help which is more than feasible to get into the game quickly. If this comes up the offside rules and the "tactical foul" punishments will be correct and the only complaints would be?? I don't know what the world talks about if there is no one questioning a referee decision Guess just be lol £100million for Pogba and he has a haircut like that etcetc I think it says MLS wanted to be considered a real league and not a wrestling competition thus they got serious. I just am okay with the offside rule as it is, all it needs for me is consistent and understandable application. It is the exact same thing with time wasting, that no stopping play in last 10 minutes is completely unnecessary if you just start to consistently punish players. During the the 2nd leg in the Spanish cup between Bilbao and Barca the Bilbao goalkeeper took 30 seconds per goal kick from the start of the game and the referee didn't do anything in the first half. Luckily there is a German word for these proposed rules, verschlimmbessern. Just don't do that.
|
On January 20 2017 20:00 bObaZ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 18:46 Pandemona wrote: True can't say it is a bad idea without seeing what it would be like now. But isn't there a debate for just changing offside rule again or just clarifying it to be easier?
Offside - You are offside if you are ahead of the last defending by ANY part of your body when the ball is played, whether you are near the ball or not.
Just a flat rule like that so no interfering with goal keeper view or "not being active" etcetc? Linesman then just flag all the time or something i don't know. However the rule now is like 15 mini rules and stuff. Offside rule is something that clearly needs to be changed or clarified. Just to give you an example that's been discussed to oblivion this week on the Portuguese Media. Benfica suffered a goal this weekend vs Boavista that you can find below: The guy that ends up to score the goal doesn't touch the ball after the first pass. Should this be ruled offside? The rule, as it is right now, just promotes pointless discussions one after the other. Of course that's offside. The offside player is participating in the game (clearly trying to kick the ball).
|
On January 20 2017 20:55 Pandemona wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 19:51 mahrgell wrote: Mimimi... i have no cluw what (and why...) is to be changed but change is bad mimimi. Tactical fouls are supposed to be given a red card.
The daily football thread with pande...
And yes, i believe van basten ideas are certainly deserving consideration. In fact of his 8 point program i see only one I strongly disagree with. (The quarter idea) Two points I strongly agree with (team captains and time wasting) And the remaining I have either not seen in practice yet(like new penalties and offside) or I believe they should only be used for WC groupstage (extra time). Youth changes i dont care, this only touches the continental youth level anyway. Below local federations do what they want anyway.
Forgot the 8th point... whatever... still overall I think it worth discussing.
So me defending the game as it is wrong/bad? I don't get what your trying to say. All you have said is the great van basten rules/changes should be given time to be tested and trailed as they are in theory very good. Yet you yourself do not even know what he means by a "timed" penalty shoot out idea and my defending the original penalty shoot out system as it is is bad. I can't see how it could be improved by placing a "timed" theme around it. What can he theoretically do with a "timed" penalty shoot out, make it take less than 30 seconds to take your spot kick? Give a team 60 seconds to take all there penalties or something daft. On that note a penalty shoot out is very quick on the TV, by time said team taken first penalty and we have seen a replay, the next player is lining up his kick, that's pretty good from a TV perspective no? The time wasting point is something EVERYONE goes mad about but everyone's team does it. Whether they are playing a short corner and keeping in there in the last 5-10 minutes or taking an extra 4 seconds on a goal kick. Every team does it, whether you are Barcelona or Schalke etc. Im pretty sure a rule was introduced or atleast they tried to say somewhere in some domestic leagues that only a captain can talk to the referee. Maybe it is in England where they are trying that or it was that only the Captain can question a decision. But it doesn't get enforced by the referee's they sometimes let some slide as they know a human reacts negatively when things don't go there way. Exactly like what you are doing, i'm not agreeing with your views on the great Van Basten new 8 point revolution to improve the game so your responding with petty insults to justify your points. To be clear as well i did say what needs to be changed to improve the game and that was more technology to help officials, the game itself the football is more than fine imo and i can't see anyone complaining week in week out that the game is "boring" to watch or "omg penaltys so shit wish we could do 25m run at the keeper" lol. Or "extra time is so bad" thats why these changes he is proposing are left field as hell Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 20:49 sneirac wrote:On January 20 2017 20:42 bObaZ wrote: Just for reference, this wasn't ruled offside.
The majority of Referees and Ex-Referees are saying that this should have been an offside, but you still have some ex-referees that say that since the goalkeeper is in the line and there's no defender close to the ball this shouldn't be an offside.
If after the video, and with a clear intention of the player to try to touch the ball, and you still divide opinions, that clearly says that the video referee won't solve the issue.
You really need to change some rules regarding penaltys and offsides... But change them to what? How can you make this more clear without simplifying and making it worse? Current rule from Fifa laws: Active play: • Interfering with play • Interfering with an opponent • Gaining advantage Fairly obvious that the player in your example interfered with the play. I remember a situation from Bundesliga from one of the last seasons. There was an own goal, because a defender had to try to clear the ball that was passed to a player in an offside position. Since this player did not get close to the ball Markus Merk argued that this was not offside because he was not active. He clearly was, sometimes people that should know better are just wrong. That's why i suggest you just make it any player no matter if active or attempting the ball or not is offside if any part of him is beyond the last defender. That makes it black or white no? That would be the rule change to simplify it imo.
That's what the rule used to be, before they added "actively participating" (I think in the 90s).
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51354 Posts
"My opinion is.. this wonderful game that we all love doesn’t need rule changes.
"What we are doing, with the World Cup changes, puts the game in danger. They try to squeeze everything out of it but I don’t think they care about the future of football.
"Was it a real idea? He [van Basten] can create another game. There is enough pitches around the world."
Jurgen Klopp on Van Basten "points"
On January 20 2017 22:52 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On January 20 2017 20:55 Pandemona wrote:On January 20 2017 19:51 mahrgell wrote: Mimimi... i have no cluw what (and why...) is to be changed but change is bad mimimi. Tactical fouls are supposed to be given a red card.
The daily football thread with pande...
And yes, i believe van basten ideas are certainly deserving consideration. In fact of his 8 point program i see only one I strongly disagree with. (The quarter idea) Two points I strongly agree with (team captains and time wasting) And the remaining I have either not seen in practice yet(like new penalties and offside) or I believe they should only be used for WC groupstage (extra time). Youth changes i dont care, this only touches the continental youth level anyway. Below local federations do what they want anyway.
Forgot the 8th point... whatever... still overall I think it worth discussing.
So me defending the game as it is wrong/bad? I don't get what your trying to say. All you have said is the great van basten rules/changes should be given time to be tested and trailed as they are in theory very good. Yet you yourself do not even know what he means by a "timed" penalty shoot out idea and my defending the original penalty shoot out system as it is is bad. I can't see how it could be improved by placing a "timed" theme around it. What can he theoretically do with a "timed" penalty shoot out, make it take less than 30 seconds to take your spot kick? Give a team 60 seconds to take all there penalties or something daft. On that note a penalty shoot out is very quick on the TV, by time said team taken first penalty and we have seen a replay, the next player is lining up his kick, that's pretty good from a TV perspective no? The time wasting point is something EVERYONE goes mad about but everyone's team does it. Whether they are playing a short corner and keeping in there in the last 5-10 minutes or taking an extra 4 seconds on a goal kick. Every team does it, whether you are Barcelona or Schalke etc. Im pretty sure a rule was introduced or atleast they tried to say somewhere in some domestic leagues that only a captain can talk to the referee. Maybe it is in England where they are trying that or it was that only the Captain can question a decision. But it doesn't get enforced by the referee's they sometimes let some slide as they know a human reacts negatively when things don't go there way. Exactly like what you are doing, i'm not agreeing with your views on the great Van Basten new 8 point revolution to improve the game so your responding with petty insults to justify your points. To be clear as well i did say what needs to be changed to improve the game and that was more technology to help officials, the game itself the football is more than fine imo and i can't see anyone complaining week in week out that the game is "boring" to watch or "omg penaltys so shit wish we could do 25m run at the keeper" lol. Or "extra time is so bad" thats why these changes he is proposing are left field as hell On January 20 2017 20:49 sneirac wrote:On January 20 2017 20:42 bObaZ wrote: Just for reference, this wasn't ruled offside.
The majority of Referees and Ex-Referees are saying that this should have been an offside, but you still have some ex-referees that say that since the goalkeeper is in the line and there's no defender close to the ball this shouldn't be an offside.
If after the video, and with a clear intention of the player to try to touch the ball, and you still divide opinions, that clearly says that the video referee won't solve the issue.
You really need to change some rules regarding penaltys and offsides... But change them to what? How can you make this more clear without simplifying and making it worse? Current rule from Fifa laws: Active play: • Interfering with play • Interfering with an opponent • Gaining advantage Fairly obvious that the player in your example interfered with the play. I remember a situation from Bundesliga from one of the last seasons. There was an own goal, because a defender had to try to clear the ball that was passed to a player in an offside position. Since this player did not get close to the ball Markus Merk argued that this was not offside because he was not active. He clearly was, sometimes people that should know better are just wrong. That's why i suggest you just make it any player no matter if active or attempting the ball or not is offside if any part of him is beyond the last defender. That makes it black or white no? That would be the rule change to simplify it imo. That's what the rule used to be, before they added "actively participating" (I think in the 90s). Oh right yeah i know the offside rule has changed alot didn't know it was much simpler back then which is i think a way to maybe go back too idk.
|
|
|
|