bigfatmonkey
Andy Booth Terrier
Ooh to be a, ooh to be a terrier
Posts: 3,031
|
Post by bigfatmonkey on Mar 7, 2019 20:38:32 GMT 1
Think one is missing, no rebounds from penalties, if you miss or hit the post, the game will be stopped and restarted.. Not sure what I think about that. Fake news (fortunately, in my opinion!) |
|
|
|
Post by Million Dollar Babies on Mar 9, 2019 23:26:45 GMT 1
I've a new one for Fifa to implement
After you score a goal you have 30 seconds to get back in to your half of the pitch. If not back after 30 seconds, the opposition can restart the game
|
|
|
|
Post by themanfromatlantis on Mar 9, 2019 23:36:47 GMT 1
I've a new one for Fifa to implement After you score a goal you have 30 seconds to get back in to your half of the pitch. If not back after 30 seconds, the opposition can restart the game Not a chance unfortunately, but that's all it should take... They do this occasionally though - when they've just scored a late goal to grab a draw, or get within a goal of their opponent. They never feck about then do they... It will take yrs to get cheating out of the game, it's built in at all levels of the game now, influenced by the cheating bastards at the highest levels. Says a lot when the videos that tend to get played demonstrating sportsmanship & fair play are few & far between. I think the one you see played a lot is the Claude Puyol one... |
|
|
|
Post by imissmarcus on Mar 9, 2019 23:49:19 GMT 1
In the interest of dealing with cheating/gamesmanship, I'd like to see a rule where yellow cards are carried to a substitute replacing a player on a booking - would help deal with rotational fouling etc. Maybe needs to be greater context, perhaps it is an escalation from yellow rather than just all bookings i.e. player booked, keeps fouling and gets a final word then subbed, in that case the card should carry to the replacement. Not necessarily for one who has one mistimed tackle.
|
|
|
|
Post by yappledapple on May 20, 2019 17:16:14 GMT 1
Can anyone tell me, regarding the new rules next season; for penalty kicks, why aren’t goalkeepers allowed to touch the posts beforehand? Is it a time wasting thing as I honestly can’t see the point of this new rule. Someone please enlighten my ignorance!
Edit - And does posts include the crossbar as lots of goalkeepers like to touch/grab it before the kick is taken. Danny Ward did it in the two play-off shoot-outs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on May 20, 2019 17:30:03 GMT 1
Meanwhile Fifa president Gianni Infantino says men can learn from women when it comes to behaviour. He said: ‘Women are nicer than men. Probably generally because sometimes we men feel that we need to show how strong we are. This is reflected in some of the behaviour in society in general but also on the football pitch.’ Obviously never been to Huddersfield... Why do they have to try and sanitise game of testosterone fuelled edge from the game? |
|
|
|
Post by specialun on May 20, 2019 19:46:32 GMT 1
Has anyone told the refs?
Did the most important rule make it? Michael Oliver must never be allowed within 10 miles of Huddersfield?
At least we’ll get the Aussie A League ref that’s coming over next season until he’s promoted to the Premier League the following year
|
|
|
|
Post by joeyjoneslocker on May 20, 2019 19:51:05 GMT 1
Obviously never been to Huddersfield... Why do they have to try and sanitise game of testosterone fuelled edge from the game? Because we live in a world run by nut jobs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2019 19:55:20 GMT 1
Can anyone tell me, regarding the new rules next season; for penalty kicks, why aren’t goalkeepers allowed to touch the posts beforehand? Is it a time wasting thing as I honestly can’t see the point of this new rule. Someone please enlighten my ignorance! Edit - And does posts include the crossbar as lots of goalkeepers like to touch/grab it before the kick is taken. Danny Ward did it in the two play-off shoot-outs. There's a big difference between walking four yards each way to touch the goalposts and reaching up and touching the crossbar time wasting wise.. |
|
|
|
Post by 28901 on May 21, 2019 23:56:49 GMT 1
should make the keepers take the goal kick from the side it went out,sheilding the ball near the corner flag should be obstruction, Strange that because that's how it used to be. I don't think obstruction really exists now. You couldn't shield the ball out when I was a lad. |
|
|
|
Post by football on May 22, 2019 0:13:06 GMT 1
Mally Brown used to shield the ball out of play and with his wing span people didn't get around him
|
|
|
|
Post by Convictatthemac on May 22, 2019 4:47:55 GMT 1
If you roll through 540 degrees after a foul, it’s an instant yellow. If you take it through 900 degrees of rolling, straight red.
If you grab the wrong shin/ankle/knee, yellow. If you realise you’ve grabbed the wrong shin/ankle/knee, then go to grab the other shin/ankle/knee, then it’s a straight red.
If you grab the ball to time waste at a throw-in and can’t lob the ball to the player looking for the quick throw-in within 2s of being in place for the throw, then it’s a yellow. If you all of a sudden develop an inability to lob a ball to an opponent that takes more than a second to arrive accurately, then it’s a yellow.
If you make a tv(drawing a box with two fingers) signal, then the team gets a warning. Do it again and both players get a yellow.
If you are Sean Dyche you get a fine for being Sean Dyche. If you complain in post game media conference about decisions, that’s ok. If you do complain about decisions, but get away with a decision that you’ve complained about previously, if you don’t admit to getting away with one this time, it’s a fine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2019 11:11:38 GMT 1
should make the keepers take the goal kick from the side it went out,sheilding the ball near the corner flag should be obstruction, Strange that because that's how it used to be. I don't think obstruction really exists now. You couldn't shield the ball out when I was a lad. Goal kicks taken from anywhere in side the six yard box came in in 1992. I vaguely recall it was to prevent time wasting...but it increased time wasting although allowed teams who didn’t want to time waste to save a few seconds. It should be...if you’re ahead or level you have to take it from the side if went out, no faffing about...10 seconds from keeper placing the ball on the ground to taking the kick should be plenty, and would prevent that awful time wasting tactic where teams (like Town) now assume that it’s ok to spread your centre half’s wide, waste time thinking about passing to them, and then gesticulating to  them away, keeper wastes more time waiting for them to trundle off before kicking it long. If you’re behind, take the kick from where you want and take as long as you want about it. |
|
|
|
Post by 28901 on May 22, 2019 11:46:11 GMT 1
Strange that because that's how it used to be. I don't think obstruction really exists now. You couldn't shield the ball out when I was a lad. Goal kicks taken from anywhere in side the six yard box came in in 1992. I vaguely recall it was to prevent time wasting...but it increased time wasting although allowed teams who didn’t want to time waste to save a few seconds. It should be...if you’re ahead or level you have to take it from the side if went out, no faffing about...10 seconds from keeper placing the ball on the ground to taking the kick should be plenty, and would prevent that awful time wasting tactic where teams (like Town) now assume that it’s ok to spread your centre half’s wide, waste time thinking about passing to them, and then gesticulating to them away, keeper wastes more time waiting for them to trundle off before kicking it long. If you’re behind, take the kick from where you want and take as long as you want about it. 1992? Really? I thought it was about 5 years ago. Then again I find it hard to believe I have now seen Town play in he new ground for more years than old Leeds Road. |
|
|
|
Post by Oblong of Dreams on May 22, 2019 12:02:05 GMT 1
They should outlaw shielding the ball out of play. Drives me nuts. It’s one thing if the ball is rolling out quickly but when the defender dances around the ball to block the attacker from getting the ball it is clear obstruction and used to be called that. Agree with this. If you use your body/arms to block an opponent from playing the ball, you should be deemed to be "in possession" and have "played the ball" even if you haven't touched it. Therefore once it goes dead the corner/throw goes to the opponent. |
|
|
|
Post by 28901 on May 22, 2019 12:51:54 GMT 1
They should outlaw shielding the ball out of play. Drives me nuts. It’s one thing if the ball is rolling out quickly but when the defender dances around the ball to block the attacker from getting the ball it is clear obstruction and used to be called that. Agree with this. If you use your body/arms to block an opponent from playing the ball, you should be deemed to be "in possession" and have "played the ball" even if you haven't touched it. Therefore once it goes dead the corner/throw goes to the opponent. It is quite clear in my 1960's referees handbook (complete with black and white hand drawn illustrations) that a defender shielding the ball out for a deadball is obstruction and an indirect free kick to be awarded to the attacking team. There is even a drawing of the incident. You always know who is cheating / fouling / unsporting in the illustrations because he is drawn as a bit of a ruffian with a messy shock of hair, shirt out of his shorts, while the innocent party has a neat side parting and short back and sides. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2019 13:35:41 GMT 1
Agree with this. If you use your body/arms to block an opponent from playing the ball, you should be deemed to be "in possession" and have "played the ball" even if you haven't touched it. Therefore once it goes dead the corner/throw goes to the opponent. It is quite clear in my 1960's referees handbook (complete with black and white hand drawn illustrations) that a defender shielding the ball out for a deadball is obstruction and an indirect free kick to be awarded to the attacking team. There is even a drawing of the incident. You always know who is cheating / fouling / unsporting in the illustrations because he is drawn as a bit of a ruffian with a messy shock of hair, shirt out of his shorts, while the innocent party has a neat side parting and short back and sides. Your 1960s handbook was written before the 1997 rule change from obstruction to impeding, along with a definition that ALLOWS shielding. Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.I guess the real complication is that a fair charge is not explicitly defined in the laws of the game (but presumably is detailed in the refs guidelines for applying the rules)...so you end up with fans crying for a foul if they support the defending team where they’re happy to see the ball shielded out but not happy when the opposing striker shoulder barges him out of the way. And conversely if you support the attacking team you get old duffers crying for obstruction, and then cheering as the attacker swipes the defender to the floor with a sweep of his legs, which is clearly not a fair charge... Define fair charge publicly and everyone is happy. |
|
|
|
Post by 28901 on May 22, 2019 15:30:13 GMT 1
It is quite clear in my 1960's referees handbook (complete with black and white hand drawn illustrations) that a defender shielding the ball out for a deadball is obstruction and an indirect free kick to be awarded to the attacking team. There is even a drawing of the incident. You always know who is cheating / fouling / unsporting in the illustrations because he is drawn as a bit of a ruffian with a messy shock of hair, shirt out of his shorts, while the innocent party has a neat side parting and short back and sides. Your 1960s handbook was written before the 1997 rule change from obstruction to impeding, along with a definition that ALLOWS shielding. Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.I guess the real complication is that a fair charge is not explicitly defined in the laws of the game (but presumably is detailed in the refs guidelines for applying the rules)...so you end up with fans crying for a foul if they support the defending team where they’re happy to see the ball shielded out but not happy when the opposing striker shoulder barges him out of the way. And conversely if you support the attacking team you get old duffers crying for obstruction, and then cheering as the attacker swipes the defender to the floor with a sweep of his legs, which is clearly not a fair charge... Define fair charge publicly and everyone is happy. Thinking about the drawings, it could even be late 50s. It was given to me as a kid by a long gone family friend (the ones you used to call uncle though not a relation) . He was a fairly high up non league referee, I think ran the line in actual FA cup early round games. He used to take me to the Shay, Leeds Road and occasionally Valley Parade before I really supported anyone, I suspect he got free tickets.
I'm going to see if I can find it up int' loft.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2019 15:50:30 GMT 1
Your 1960s handbook was written before the 1997 rule change from obstruction to impeding, along with a definition that ALLOWS shielding. Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.I guess the real complication is that a fair charge is not explicitly defined in the laws of the game (but presumably is detailed in the refs guidelines for applying the rules)...so you end up with fans crying for a foul if they support the defending team where they’re happy to see the ball shielded out but not happy when the opposing striker shoulder barges him out of the way. And conversely if you support the attacking team you get old duffers crying for obstruction, and then cheering as the attacker swipes the defender to the floor with a sweep of his legs, which is clearly not a fair charge... Define fair charge publicly and everyone is happy. Thinking about the drawings, it could even be late 50s. It was given to me as a kid by a long gone family friend (the ones you used to call uncle though not a relation) . He was a fairly high up non league referee, I think ran the line in actual FA cup early round games. He used to take me to the Shay, Leeds Road and occasionally Valley Parade before I really supported anyone, I suspect he got free tickets.
I'm going to see if I can find it up int' loft.
Would love to see a few photos of that...my old man had one and I know exactly what you mean about the hand drawn swarthy players used to demonstrate offside etc, although I’m not really sure why he had it, he always played football rather than refereed as far as I recall, and he definitely didn’t go on to referee after he’d finished playing. |
|
|
|
Post by Torquayterrier on May 22, 2019 20:58:50 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by Solihull Terrier on May 23, 2019 10:28:47 GMT 1
Far too many teams involved, but it would have been nice to see some sort of regional integration to help heal some of the wounds and resentment that still festers over there. |
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on May 23, 2019 10:53:37 GMT 1
time keeper...that alone would sort out a great many annoying habits within the game..yes we might have a couple of long games to start with but it would not last long..
|
|
|
|
Post by CaptainHart on May 23, 2019 15:03:32 GMT 1
It is quite clear in my 1960's referees handbook (complete with black and white hand drawn illustrations) that a defender shielding the ball out for a deadball is obstruction and an indirect free kick to be awarded to the attacking team. There is even a drawing of the incident. You always know who is cheating / fouling / unsporting in the illustrations because he is drawn as a bit of a ruffian with a messy shock of hair, shirt out of his shorts, while the innocent party has a neat side parting and short back and sides. Your 1960s handbook was written before the 1997 rule change from obstruction to impeding, along with a definition that ALLOWS shielding. Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.I guess the real complication is that a fair charge is not explicitly defined in the laws of the game (but presumably is detailed in the refs guidelines for applying the rules)...so you end up with fans crying for a foul if they support the defending team where they’re happy to see the ball shielded out but not happy when the opposing striker shoulder barges him out of the way. And conversely if you support the attacking team you get old duffers crying for obstruction, and then cheering as the attacker swipes the defender to the floor with a sweep of his legs, which is clearly not a fair charge... Define fair charge publicly and everyone is happy. My problem with the 1997 change is the interpretation of within playing distance. These days defenders are blocking players with their bodies when the ball is three or four metres away. |
|
them away, keeper wastes more time waiting for them to trundle off before kicking it long.
