The Football News Thread 2014/15 - Everything not Wolves News Related

[Paddingtonwolf]

Sterling says he wants to be considered. That would be a very good side next year.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

What is silly? Not wishing to jump into your own argument but can I make some points for debate? What is silly in this Platini idea is treating dissent any differently from any other rules transgression. Dissent, if sufficiently serious can be either a yellow or red card offence. Why have a ten minute sin-bin for dissent and not for, say, the second yellow card foul that was really nothing more than a mistimed challenge with no intent to injure or recklessness toward dangerous play? What is it about dissent that should be different? In my opinion, dissent should still be treated under the usual laws of the game, but the referees should actually be sticklers about it. A succession of players actually getting into disciplinary hot water for opening their traps might actually encourage managers to stamp out backchat and respect the referee?

Just me joining in, hope you don't mind

 

[Johnny75]

I agree with everything you've said there Paddy. If it's not working then make it work don't just bury your head in the sand and hope it will work.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

Just me joining in, hope you don't mind

Join in with pleasure. I do think that Platini was not advocating a change in the laws of the game, he was just re-opening a long held debate about dissent. In rugby, if you argue with the referee over a decision, then the ball is moved forward ten yards. We toyed with it in football, but should have stuck with it. Referees cannot be undermined by players surrounding the. The captain is the spokesperson for the team, and if there is a query, he is the one, and the only one who should ask the referee to explain his decision. Sin bins may or may not be introduced, but that would require changes to the laws, and would not be that easy to implement.

 

[Tony Towner]

Join in with pleasure. I do think that Platini was not advocating a change in the laws of the game, he was just re-opening a long held debate about dissent. In rugby, if you argue with the referee over a decision, then the ball is moved forward ten yards. We toyed with it in football, but should have stuck with it. Referees cannot be undermined by players surrounding the. The captain is the spokesperson for the team, and if there is a query, he is the one, and the only one who should ask the referee to explain his decision. Sin bins may or may not be introduced, but that would require changes to the laws, and would not be that easy to implement.

The rugby argument really winds me up. They are totally different games and should be treated as such. Some things that happen in Rugby (both codes), would be totally abhorrent in football and vice versa. Yes, they call the referee sir and dissent is limited, but imagine if a footballer was caught eye gauging or doing what Flower did last weekend. Equally footballers feign injury and are disrespectful to officials. Different games, different standards, different codes of conduct. The ten yards didn't work in football, it was confusing, inconsistently officiated and on occasions disadvantaged the attacking team..... a free kick 10 yds out is less likely to go in with 11 men on the goal line than one 20 yds out. In Rugby the same situation would advantage the attacking side

 

[FrankMunro-371]

I agree with everything you've said there Paddy. If it's not working then make it work don't just bury your head in the sand and hope it will work.

The problem as I see it Johnny, is that you argue with everything I say just for the sake of it. If I said that bonfire night fell on 5th November you would disagree with me.

Anyway, such is life. I asked you a couple of questions which you have failed to answer. Also by agreeing with Paddy you are contradicting what you said earlier.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

The rugby argument really winds me up. They are totally different games and should be treated as such. Some things that happen in Rugby (both codes), would be totally abhorrent in football and vice versa. Yes, they call the referee sir and dissent is limited, but imagine if a footballer was caught eye gauging or doing what Flower did last weekend. Equally footballers feign injury and are disrespectful to officials. Different games, different standards, different codes of conduct. The ten yards didn't work in football, it was confusing, inconsistently officiated and on occasions disadvantaged the attacking team..... a free kick 10 yds out is less likely to go in with 11 men on the goal line than one 20 yds out. In Rugby the same situation would advantage the attacking side

The comparison with Rugby is relevant because of the different way that they treat officials. Nothing I have heard over the years has made me understand why football referees should be treated so differently. And the ten yard rule would have worked just fine had it been given time.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

The rugby argument really winds me up. They are totally different games and should be treated as such. Some things that happen in Rugby (both codes), would be totally abhorrent in football and vice versa. Yes, they call the referee sir and dissent is limited, but imagine if a footballer was caught eye gauging or doing what Flower did last weekend. Equally footballers feign injury and are disrespectful to officials. Different games, different standards, different codes of conduct. The ten yards didn't work in football, it was confusing, inconsistently officiated and on occasions disadvantaged the attacking team..... a free kick 10 yds out is less likely to go in with 11 men on the goal line than one 20 yds out. In Rugby the same situation would advantage the attacking side

The comparison with Rugby is relevant because of the different way that they treat officials. Nothing I have heard over the years has made me understand why football referees should be treated so differently. And the ten yard rule would have worked just fine had it been given time.

 

[Tony Towner]

It didn't work though and wouldn't, I have explained why but you have chosen to ignore it. I will repeat, more often than not it either had no affect (10 yds in your own half) or penalised the attacking side.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

The comparison with Rugby is relevant because of the different way that they treat officials. Nothing I have heard over the years has made me understand why football referees should be treated so differently.

Rugby is a game for thugs played by gentlemen. Football is a game for gentlemen played by thugs.

A truism, but it says it all.

 

[Paul]

I know I've posted this before, but you've got to love Nigel Owens :

 

[lemonjelly]

I understand why the comparison to rugby is made. I don't think transferring the 10 yard rule works though.

Rugby is much more a territorial game. The moving forwards 10 yards is advantageous to the team who are not dissenting, & works against the dissenting team.
When tried in football, many examples occurred where the moving forward 10 yards actually worked to the detriment of the team who's favour the decision was being made, and was an advantage to the dissenting team. Hence it didn't work - actually it was counter-productive.

I said before, dissent is actually a bookable offence is it not?

I also think that referees should start the process, by (stealing this from rugby) ceasing to refer to players by name, referring to teams/players by their shirt colour/number, & actually booking people for dissent.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

Rugby is a game for thugs played by gentlemen. Football is a game for gentlemen played by thugs.

A truism, but it says it all.

St Helens may not quite see it that way.....!

 

[Alan]

I know I've posted this before, but you've got to love Nigel Owens :

That's brilliant, and I agree. Were I to ref a soccer match I'd have my card out for anyone that asked me to give one to someone else.

Numbs the mind, does that practice.

 

[Johnny75]

The problem as I see it Johnny, is that you argue with everything I say just for the sake of it. If I said that bonfire night fell on 5th November you would disagree with me.

Anyway, such is life. I asked you a couple of questions which you have failed to answer. Also by agreeing with Paddy you are contradicting what you said earlier.

I disagree with you because you are wrong on a lot of things you make statements on. To answer your questions:

Your stance on refereeing not changing is silly.

I conducted a study in 2005 through the PGMOB (but I'm not sure in what guise it was at the time) and had a 98% response (anonymous) of which 94% were in favour of change through technology or laws of the game. I'm not sure on the percentage but I would wager only 20% of those referees have retired from the professional game. Interestingly those who had officiated right at the top wanted change more than those at the bottom of the league.

Refereeing has to change to include changing attitudes, visibility and reflect the fluidity of the game. I have a different view on change and would take the approach to adjust first rather than react later. I think you're a relic in a blazer whose time has gone and experience not valid anymore. It happens to us all in the end if we don't move with the times.

And I don't believe I contradicted any of my posts by agreeing with Paddy, you need to learn to read through everybody's posts and not be so patronising. A long shot I know.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

Was this study in relation to concerns that officials were being instructed to change their interpretation of the offside law? As I do recall there being a bit of a furore within the game about certain situations where the law was being applied differently in England than elsewhere. Keith Hackett did address this at the time. All PGMOB officials are at the same level, so I am not sure how you differentiate between those at the top and those at the bottom.

The referees association are constantly looking at ways to improve refereeing. This not only includes performance, but relationships with clubs, a much better and uniform assessing system, better training facilities, and mentoring new referees as they start out. We believe it can only help referees if they are offered such assistance, though there are not enough assessors and mentors to cover everyone, but a start has been made, with very positive feedback from referees. For too long a referee was often a lonely figure, with little or no assistance. This has changed and will continue to.

I shall not comment on your personal attacks on me.

 

[Johnny75]

The study did coincide with the changing of the interpretation of the offside rule but was a broader study. You must read what was written, I said those that had officiated at the top level, some officials had never officiated or assisted above Lg1 and it showed in the answers. I really liked Keith Hackett, an excellent leader, thinker and a man who really wanted to drive change.

I'm pleased the Referees Assoc has changed the way they do things and it was your response that illicited my reply on change. You have not said whether you favour this change, were opposed to it at the time or just went along with the flow. It's the drivers for change that are important and if the RA and PGMOL are going in this direction then we should see change for the better and sooner rather than the 'Them's the rulez' response you took earlier in the thread.

For context, the RA and PGMOL are broadly in favour of trying most technological advances to aid the game, the sticking point is the FA itself which is so afraid of change it's backwards. We are not alone in this and whilst Platini's idea is out of whack (which is where I agreed with Paddy) it least we are getting ideas to better the game. I just hope all are given the same airing rather than the few from the top.

 

[NorwayFB]

Bielsa doing alright with Marseille,8 wins in a row now and 7 points ahead of the pack.

 

[Lycan]

Bielsa doing alright with Marseille,8 wins in a row now and 7 points ahead of the pack.

[video]https://v.cdn.vine.co/r/videos/9CD97E00B81135607931245842432_2619241933f.5.1.1583 8541154978435601.mp4?versionId=OLtkFu8YSptnUbtBG6R JXxXrQyWZ3vdo[/video]

A few slip ups along the way though...

 

[Lord Knows]

Bielsa doing alright with Marseille,8 wins in a row now and 7 points ahead of the pack.

If you want one very good season sign up Bielsa, after that his training regimes burn out players. With Gignac likely to move to Arsenal it could all fall apart quicker than anticipated.