Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [23rd - 26th January 2016]

xxalxx said:
:)
Click to expand...

I was stunned to discover yesterday that some Norwich staff member (whether it was a stadium official or a staff member of Norwich FC itself) actually complained about Klopps behaviour in that celebration.

Stunned.

THIS is what our game SHOULD be about, the managers should all be full of this sort of emotion and passion. Cant believe someone would complain about it
 
anticonscience said:
I hope so, I really want Leicester to win the league.

15 games to go.
Click to expand...

Just think of some of the all time great players who have graced the English league and not come away with a champions medal...will be crazy to think of some of the players who will have one if Leicester win the league.

I know that sounds really derogatory but I mean it only in comparison to some of the names who havent won one.

Its been a crazy crazy season for sure, Chelsea sacking their manager, Liverpool sacking their manager, Utd (looks like) sacking their manager. Leicester top with 15 to go.

Hopefully Leicester will win the league from this point, such a bizarre year !
 
Tombstone said:
I was stunned to discover yesterday that some Norwich staff member (whether it was a stadium official or a staff member of Norwich FC itself) actually complained about Klopps behaviour in that celebration.

Stunned.

THIS is what our game SHOULD be about, the managers should all be full of this sort of emotion and passion. Cant believe someone would complain about it
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it doesn't surprise me, there are miserable buggers everywhere!
 
Trusty said:
Definitely, it's really dated the last man rule. Punishment doesn't fit the crime i think.
Click to expand...

What is this last man rule you speak of?

Do you mean, denying a goalscoring opportunity? That is a red card and rightly so.

Arsenal were abysmal, Chelsea marginally better. Mert was stupid, as soon as he went to ground he invited Costa to dive, Costa would rather go down and get a player sent off than have the clear opportunity to score.
 
Tummy said:
What is this last man rule you speak of?

Do you mean, denying a goalscoring opportunity? That is a red card and rightly so.
Click to expand...

And you can give away a penalty and only get a yellow card too. But seeing as youre last man, it's apparently a straight red. Thats my point, it doesn't seem to add up at times.
 
Trusty said:
And you can give away a penalty and only get a yellow card too. But seeing as youre last man, it's apparently a straight red. Thats my point, it doesn't seem to add up at times.
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure what you're saying. Red cards are given for denying clear goalscoring opportunities whether the challenge happens in or outside the box. Not all penalties deny clear goalscoring opportunities so why would a red need to be given?
 
But in a lot of instances you see goal scoring opportunies denied and just yellows given. Theres so much that could happen from when Costa dives to when he gets to Cech, the rules are the rules and Mert is an idiot, i'm not saying he shouldn't have got a red. Just that sometimes it doesn't add up sending a man off for the rest of the match. This is why we need sin bins in the game.
 
An accidental handball when the ball is going away from goal and out for a throw/corner if the ref thought your hand was in an unnatural position would result in a penalty and a yellow card. It shouldn't be a red card, because you're not denying a goalscoring opportunity.
 
Trusty said:
But in a lot of instances you see goal scoring opportunies denied and just yellows given. Theres so much that could happen from when Costa dives to when he gets to Cech, the rules are the rules and Mert is an idiot, i'm not saying he shouldn't have got a red. Just that sometimes it doesn't add up sending a man off for the rest of the match. This is why we need sin bins in the game.
Click to expand...

The only time you see goalscoring opportunities being denied and only a yellow being given is when the ref has made a mistake. If they ref thinks a clear goalscoring opportunity has been denied it's a red, simple.

As for there being so much that could happen after Costa is brought down - what exactly? He was clear through 1 on 1 with the keeper, other than tripping himself up he would have had a great opportunity to score. It's a clear red.
 
BaZ87 said:
The only time you see goalscoring opportunities being denied and only a yellow being given is when the ref has made a mistake. If they ref thinks a clear goalscoring opportunity has been denied it's a red, simple.

As for there being so much that could happen after Costa is brought down - what exactly? He was clear through 1 on 1 with the keeper, other than tripping himself up he would have had a great opportunity to score. It's a clear red.
Click to expand...

Yeah, think outside the box Baz, i'm not saying it's not a red. According to the rules, it's a red. I'm saying that the rules are slightly dated and that it doesn't lend itself to fair game considering the foul. 10 men for the rest of the match for that foul is quite ridiculous really. I'm not the only one that's saying this though, we've talked about this on FA coaching a fair amount. Sin bins would provide an additional penalty that could be used when a red card is too harsh.
 
Trusty said:
Yeah, think outside the box Baz, i'm not saying it's not a red. According to the rules, it's a red. I'm saying that the rules are slightly dated and that it doesn't lend itself to fair game considering the foul. 10 men for the rest of the match for that foul is quite ridiculous really. I'm not the only one that's saying this though, we've talked about this on FA coaching a fair amount. Sin bins would provide an additional penalty that could be used when a red card is too harsh.
Click to expand...

Why's it ridiculous? If you've fouled an opponent and denied them a clear chance to score there has to be a significant punishment or every time an attacker is running through clear on goal, the defender will just haul him down.
 
BaZ87 said:
Why's it ridiculous? If you've fouled an opponent and denied them a clear chance to score there has to be a significant punishment or every time an attacker is running through clear on goal, the defender will just haul him down.
Click to expand...

exactly, significant punishment not ultimate like a red card. Sin bin i say.

..give him an orange card!

jonneymendoza said:
So who wants wenger sacked?
Click to expand...

You?
 
Trusty said:
You're dillusional, Chelsea were only in the gear they needed to be to win that game. Had Arsenal equalised, they would have taken it up a notch and got another goal.
Click to expand...

your team played crap yesterday tbh. Just arsenal played worse, that is all.

Chelsea was teh easiest and crappiest team we played compared to liverpool and stoke
 
Trusty said:
exactly, significant punishment not ultimate like a red card. Sin bin i say.
Click to expand...

Neither a sin bin nor an orange card is a significant punishment. If all you're getting is a 10 or 15 minute sin bin then every defender is going to bring the attacker down because the loss of a goal (particularly the first goal in a big match) is far bigger than losing a player for 10 minutes.

The red card has to be there to act as a deterrent because without it all you're going to see is defenders rugby tackling strikers when they're running through on goal. I'd actually like to see a panel being able to increase the length of the ban from 1 game to 3 in certain situations - for example if your team is winning 1-0 with 5 minutes to go and you haul the striker down to prevent him scoring, it should be a greater ban than Mert got for yesterdays foul.
 
BaZ87 said:
Neither a sin bin nor an orange card is a significant punishment. If all you're getting is a 10 or 15 minute sin bin then every defender is going to bring the attacker down because the loss of a goal (particularly the first goal in a big match) is far bigger than losing a player for 10 minutes.

The red card has to be there to act as a deterrent because without it all you're going to see is defenders rugby tackling strikers when they're running through on goal. I'd actually like to see a panel being able to increase the length of the ban from 1 game to 3 in certain situations - for example if your team is winning 1-0 with 5 minutes to go and you haul the striker down to prevent him scoring, it should be a greater ban than Mert got for yesterdays foul.
Click to expand...

I agree, if players are rugby tackling players and making ridiculous leaps at the player, that's fine. I don't disagree. I'm all for red cards when its dangerous and stuff. But yesterday wasn't, it was an honest slide for the ball with hadly any contact. Length of sin bin time would need a lot of deliberating on. You would need to get it right. 30 mins maybe? 25? I don't know. Something significant anyway.
 
BaZ87 said:
Neither a sin bin nor an orange card is a significant punishment. If all you're getting is a 10 or 15 minute sin bin then every defender is going to bring the attacker down because the loss of a goal (particularly the first goal in a big match) is far bigger than losing a player for 10 minutes.

The red card has to be there to act as a deterrent because without it all you're going to see is defenders rugby tackling strikers when they're running through on goal. I'd actually like to see a panel being able to increase the length of the ban from 1 game to 3 in certain situations - for example if your team is winning 1-0 with 5 minutes to go and you haul the striker down to prevent him scoring, it should be a greater ban than Mert got for yesterdays foul.
Click to expand...

LOL BUT IT WASNT A FOUL!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom