So we've got football back this weekend then. Let's not bother with the inconvenience the proper supporters have to put up with then - you know, actual match-going supporters. Saturday night away in bloody Narch! As long as the couch-dwellers are happy though, eh?
The Football.....
- Thread starter Spartak
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
vickster
Legendary Member
I'd check the weather forecast though before travelling
Joey Shabadoo
My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
So Man City banned from Europe for two seasons for cheating. Will any more be facing action?
It will be overturned
Pale Rider
Legendary Member
It may be, but UEFA is a large and well-financed organisation to face down.
In this case, Manchester City's money may not give them an unfair advantage.
Chelsea accepted they did wrong, and focussed on reducing the penalty.
When the folks at City have calmed down, they may pursue a similar tactic.
One year ban with the second year suspended might be a compromise that could be reluctantly accepted by both parties.
Can't they bung EUFA some cash like Liverpool did to Man City and clear it all up?
Joey Shabadoo
My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
Smokin Joe
Squire
- Location
- Bare headed cyclist, Smoker
I watched the Wolves - Leicester match last night where VAR proved once again how it is ruining the game. Wolves had a goal disallowed because a players ankle was offside. That sort of forensic examination of decisions like that is completely out of step with the reasons the offside law was formulated.
flake99please
We all scream for ice cream
- Location
- Edinburgh
Whilst I do agree the decision appears harsh. The offside rules are clear. Talks of allowing (X)cm over cannot be considered. Where would the (no pun intended) line be drawn (X.1cm for example)?
For a goal/throw-in/corner to be given, the ball must ‘clearly’ cross the line. Why not bring the ‘clear daylight’ rule back from the past for offsides. Could VAR work if that were adopted again?
For a goal/throw-in/corner to be given, the ball must ‘clearly’ cross the line. Why not bring the ‘clear daylight’ rule back from the past for offsides. Could VAR work if that were adopted again?
Your heart has to bleed for poor, poor Rahim Sterling and the potential threat his earnings are under at present due to this Manchester City debacle. We should have a collection for him to let him know what we think of him.
On a completely separate and entirely unrelated note, does anyone have change for a 2p?
On a completely separate and entirely unrelated note, does anyone have change for a 2p?
Smokin Joe
Squire
- Location
- Bare headed cyclist, Smoker
The rules may be clear, but enforcing offside decisions to the last centimetre is ridiculous when the game has to stop for five minutes or more while they pore over umpteen different camera angles several times each is doing the game no good at all. The Wolves players were angry, the Leicester players appeared bemused as not a single one of them appealed against the goal and the fans were left hopping mad. As Paul B has pointed out before, when the ball goes in the back of the net now you only half celebrate as you are busy watching the screen to see if it is going to VAR.
We can live with refereeing errors, they have always been part of the game and the controversies have in many cases added to the allure, it's just part of life and sometimes things go in your favour, other times they don't. In attempting to sanitise the game with VAR they have ruined a lot of the spectacle. Get rid and go back to how it was, it worked well enough for long over a century.
I see that, in an amazing show of solidarity for their blue brothers, Man United will not be playing champions league football for at least 2 years.
- Location
- Somewhere wet & hilly in NW England.
We think it's brilliant - great to see injustices rectified on the pitch.
Even at the live games we have seen (two decisions went against us) the spectacle has been good - the stadium fans didn't seem too bothered at all and spent time good naturedly winding the opposition up etc.
Rules is rules - and as already said upthread; where do you stop on the interpretation front? Where is suits someone on the day? That would hardly be fair.
Slick
Guru
I'm only now catching up after being away but it seems the author has ignored some great performances from both Barker and Stewart. I know I don't need to tell you about how unlucky Jones has been but he definitely wasn't bought as a bench warmer but after the last run out I saw he certainly wouldn't even make that if I was selecting the team. I think that piece is manipulating the facts to try and make a non existent point.
On a brighter note,
Hamilton are playing a blinder.
