Beecher Networks - Web Development, Hosting & Domains
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 101 to 119 of 119

Thread: "He got the ball"...

  1. #101
    Coach BonnieShels's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Holm Span, Blackpool
    Posts
    12,026
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,397
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,635
    Thanked in
    1,813 Posts
    I don't mind the ET so much. just away goals is resolutely unfair.

    I think way too much stall is put on home advantage at that stage of a tie.
    DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?

  2. #102
    International Prospect osarusan's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    7,908
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,206
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,787
    Thanked in
    999 Posts
    IFAB have come up with a list of possible rule changes to be discussed.

    http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40311889

    The main one is that 45-minute halves be replaced with 30-minute halves with the clock stopped when the ball goes out of play for these reasons (among others, read the link):

    from a penalty being awarded to the spot-kick being taken
    from a goal being scored until the match resumes from the kick-off
    from asking an injured player if he requires treatment to play restarting
    from the referee showing a yellow or red card to play resuming
    from the signal of a substitution to play restarting
    from a referee starting to pace a free-kick to when it is taken
    Other ideas up for discussion:
    One of the proposals would allow being able to dribble straight from a free-kick to "encourage attacking play as the player who is fouled can stop the ball and then immediately continue their dribble/attacking move". Other measures include:

    • passing to yourself at a free-kick, corner and goal-kick
    • a stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee's watch
    • allowing the goal-kick to be taken even if the ball is moving
    • a goal-kick being taken on the same side that the ball went out on
    • a "clearer and more consistent definition" of handball
    • a player who scores a goal or stops a goal with his hands gets a red card
    • a keeper who handles a backpass or throw-in from a team-mate concedes a penalty
    • the referee can award a goal if a player stops a goal being scored by handling on or close to the goal-line
    • referees can only blow for half-time or full-time when the ball goes out of play
    • a penalty kick is either scored or missed/saved and players cannot follow up to score to stop encroachment into the penalty area

  3. #103
    International Prospect NeverFeltBetter's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Gouldavoher
    Posts
    5,175
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    259
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    812
    Thanked in
    581 Posts
    30 minute halves - Very radical. Would like to have a closer look at collected data for the average amount of time a ball is dead in a match. Can't say I'm hugely in favour if only because it's such a gigantic alteration. Clock stopping is very American. More clearly defined rules and leeway for added on injury time would be preferable.

    Passing to yourself - Maybe if within your own half or something like that? Feels like a rugby rule being transplanted. Maybe "advantage" should just be applied more.

    Moving goal kicks - Yeah sure, always annoys me when they are called back. Completely needless.

    Scoring a goal with handball being a red card - Only if intentionally I presume?

    Handling backpass results in a penalty - Very harsh, indirect free-kick is perfectly fair IMO.

    Stopping a goal with handball results in goal being awarded - As long as its clear the ball was going in before it was stopped illegally, seems very sensible.

    HT/FT only coming with a deadball - That's another rugby rule, but would fit. There would have to be clarified exceptions for corners and attacking frees.

    Penalty kick rebounds banned - God yes. The poxiest way to score in football is from a penalty rebound.

    ABBA - Good idea.

    Captain's only allowed to talk to refs - Yep. Aside from being an obvious step to cut out hassling of refs, it emphasizes the role of the captain, that I think has been downgraded a bit in recent years.
    Last edited by NeverFeltBetter; 19/06/2017 at 12:39 PM.
    Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).

  4. #104
    International Prospect osarusan's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    7,908
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,206
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,787
    Thanked in
    999 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter View Post

    Passing to yourself - Maybe if within your own half or something like that? Feels like a rugby rule being transplanted. Maybe "advantage" should just be applied more.
    I wonder if that's to allow somebody brought down when through on goal (or similar) to just get up and carry on bearing down on goal whenever possible, or when, even after a foul, the opportunity to attack is still real. A redefinition of the quick free-kick.

    I don't know what this means:
    a goal-kick being taken on the same side that the ball went out on
    Isn't the law currently that a kick out can be taken from anywhere along the six yard line? Why would they want to limit it to one side?

  5. #105
    Capped Player OwlsFan's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Sadly viewing the houses that were once Milltown
    Posts
    10,393
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    875
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,373
    Thanked in
    778 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by osarusan View Post
    Isn't the law currently that a kick out can be taken from anywhere along the six yard line? Why would they want to limit it to one side?
    The rule used to be that it had to be taken from the side it went out and that was changed some years ago. Now keepers use it to waste time if necessary (i.e if it goes out to the right, the keeper gently trots over to the left to take the goal kick and vice versa). Can use up a good 30 seconds or more if done well and if it includes a few pretend shot kicks.
    Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.

  6. #106
    International Prospect NeverFeltBetter's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Gouldavoher
    Posts
    5,175
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    259
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    812
    Thanked in
    581 Posts
    Surprised not to see any mention of sinbinning now that I think of it. That would be a good deterrent to timewasting as well as anything else suggested, surely?
    Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).

  7. #107
    Biased against YOUR club pineapple stu's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2002
    Location
    In the long grass
    Posts
    38,097
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,663
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4,891
    Thanked in
    3,195 Posts
    Why is the most popular sport in the world looking at bringing in rules from less popular sports?

    Clock timers? No penalty rebounds? Dribbling free kicks? A stadium clock? Half-time/full-time only when the ball goes out of play?

    Why to any of the above? If it ain't broke, etc.

    I do agree on the goal-kick side rule though. The "penalty goal" arguably goes towards subjectivity - is there a tangible line between what does stop a goal and what doesn't? Is it going to go in off the post or bounce along the line? Does it count if the handball stops a tap-in?

  8. #108
    Godless Commie Scum
    Joined
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Co Wickla
    Posts
    11,396
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    138
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    656
    Thanked in
    436 Posts
    Personally think the stop clock is a good idea.

  9. #109
    Director dahamsta's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    The Internet
    Posts
    13,975
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    481
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    805
    Thanked in
    500 Posts

  10. Thanks From:


  11. #110
    International Prospect osarusan's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    7,908
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,206
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,787
    Thanked in
    999 Posts
    From watching games over the last few days and seeing some of the ridiculous time-wasting, what do people think of the idea (for a rule change) that if an attacking player goes inside the markings for a short corner, then a defending player is entitled to go in also.

  12. #111
    Seasoned Pro Risteard's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2004
    Location
    i tend to move about
    Posts
    4,046
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by osarusan View Post
    From watching games over the last few days and seeing some of the ridiculous time-wasting, what do people think of the idea (for a rule change) that if an attacking player goes inside the markings for a short corner, then a defending player is entitled to go in also.
    I wouldn't see the merit in that really. Nothing wrong with short corners per se and time-wasting while the ball is in play has never been an offence.
    City definetly have the best bands playing at half-time.

    O'Bama - "Eerah yeah, I'd say we can alright!"

    G.O'Mahoney Trapattoni'll sort ém out!!

  13. #112
    International Prospect osarusan's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    7,908
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,206
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,787
    Thanked in
    999 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Risteard View Post
    I wouldn't see the merit in that really. Nothing wrong with short corners per se and time-wasting while the ball is in play has never been an offence.
    It still wouldn't be an offence, would just be harder to do.

  14. #113
    International Prospect NeverFeltBetter's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Gouldavoher
    Posts
    5,175
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    259
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    812
    Thanked in
    581 Posts
    Might be better for a rule similar to a throw-in in GAA, where if the ref determines the ball isn't being played or is incapable of being played, for a few seconds, it becomes a contestable drop ball. The "into the corner" time-wasting tactic is perfectly legitimate, but I wouldn't shed a tear if it was cut out.

    On a similar level, the clock should stop for subs being made, but then the argument could be made that the clock should just stop whenever the ball is dead, and I know that's a thornier issue.
    Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).

  15. #114
    International Prospect NeverFeltBetter's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Gouldavoher
    Posts
    5,175
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    259
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    812
    Thanked in
    581 Posts
    As its not strictly VAR-related, I wanted to talk about the Ronaldo yellow card in the Portugal/Iran game here.

    The Ronaldo decision is one well-worth talking about. Leaving aside interpretation of the written laws, I was glad to see only a yellow because I'm tired of any slight contact with the upper body/head resulting in ridiculous theatrics, and Iran got away with such an incident in the first half that not even the Portuguese players appeared to want reviewed.


    But on the laws of the game, I think Ronaldo, being impeded while legally chasing after a ball, made to move around the Iranian player and reached his arm over to shove/gain leverage in the process. A foul, though you could argue it's six of one. But doing this, the arm/elbow made contact with the Iranian players face. Is there intention to hit the Iranian player in the face, or is he just trying to move him out of the way generally? Is this "violent conduct", defined as "excessive force or brutality" when not challenging for the ball? If it is, could that definition not be extended to a wide range of other kinds of pushing and shoving, like the corner-kick/set-piece stuff that has been a blight on several World Cup games?

    And what was Ronaldo given a yellow card for? He can't be given a yellow for violent conduct, so what? Persistent infringement?
    Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).

  16. Thanks From:


  17. #115
    International Prospect osarusan's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    7,908
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,206
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,787
    Thanked in
    999 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter View Post

    And what was Ronaldo given a yellow card for? He can't be given a yellow for violent conduct, so what? Persistent infringement?
    Recklessness in his attempt to get past the player?

  18. #116
    Capped Player DeLorean's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hill Valley
    Posts
    10,894
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,418
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,280
    Thanked in
    2,081 Posts
    Keith Andrews made the point that it's a red or nothing, that basically he's either only trying to get past him or he deliberately elbows him in the face, there's no in between. I don't really agree. Ronaldo was clearly annoyed with the way the Iranian was obstructing him so he did kind of shove him back using his elbow/arm. I think it was pretty harmless though in terms of force and I'm not even sure he meant to connect with his face, so for me a yellow was about right. If you're going to be sent off for an elbow, do it right.


  19. #117
    International Prospect osarusan's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    7,908
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,206
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,787
    Thanked in
    999 Posts
    Yeah, I didn't agree with Andrews either that it had to be all or nothing. I can see the argument that the fact that it was Ronaldo played on the ref's mind. But at the same time, I didn't think it was a blatant red card. It could be viewed as just a reckless attempt to push past a player.

  20. Thanks From:


  21. #118
    International Prospect NeverFeltBetter's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Gouldavoher
    Posts
    5,175
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    259
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    812
    Thanked in
    581 Posts
    Thinking about the carry-on in the hurling today, what is the punishment in football for a team that refuses to come back out for the second half of a game within the time limit? Is it a fine for the club, or does the ref actually start showing cards (unsportsmanlike conduct?). And at what point would a match be called?
    Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).

  22. #119
    Seasoned Pro
    Joined
    May 2010
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    2,662
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,280
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,854
    Thanked in
    893 Posts
    Assuming they do eventually take to the pitch and the game restarts, I'd assume the ref writes the delay up in his report and disciplinary procedures would be taken by the governing body/league afterwards. Sanction might be governed by the competition rules or be under a broad heading like bringing the game into disrepute.

    If they refuse to come out, and have no good reason for doing so, I suppose the ref would declare the match abandoned and the disciplinary outcome would probably be a 3-0 loss and maybe suspensions for individuals and the club. I don't know what constitutes a reasonable length of time and a quick look through the Laws of the Game didn't help much, but they deal more with play and on-field issues.

    It's a good question. Whatever the answer is, I reckon the outcome would be a lot more severe than the one hand wagging a finger, the other giving a thumbs up attitude of the Gah towards discipline.
    Hello, hello? What's going on? What's all this shouting, we'll have no trouble here!
    - E Tattsyrup.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 17/12/2014, 12:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •