CBlue wrote:
Bigga wrote:
You're a hypocrite and a Prick, CBlue. You're integrity for 'debate' is zilch. You have the nerve to call me about name calling?? You're worth the paper off my arse, fella.
To think that we can see club staff arguing with 4th officials all the time, on TV, who it seems talk back to them, explaining shit.
Fook me, we must all be imagining things!
Breaks of play are natural, in the game and games have been stopped willy nilly before now. You're just being an asshole in believing a game is only 90 minutes long with no breaks for any incidents or dead balls, Mr "3.5 secs to score a goal from a goal kick".
As for the time management of appeals, I've repeated myself so many times, it's just plain ridiculous and I see now that you're the Bore Me Troll on the bridge and no one shall pass. years of this bollocks now and I'm done. You can't/ won't absorb information and proceed to make shit up and pull it out of your arse.
Have your bridge, Dickhead...
Is that your long winded, trying to save face, admission that you haven't a fucking clue what you're talking about?
You can't answer a single question because you know where it will end up. You really haven't thought it through in any detail - you talk in generalisations with no specifics. When pushed on the specifics you lash out. It's a standard MO. You still haven't worked out that for an appeal to take place you have to allow the 2 teams involved to stop the game, otherwise your non-committal time frame may naturally pass. As I've already said, it is possible for a 90 minute game to take place with only 1 natural break in play - it would be highly unusual, but possible. So, you can't set a time frame based appeal system around "natural" stops in play - you have to have a mechanism for it. So much can happen between the reviewable incident occuring & this stop in play - you have to have laws on what happens to cautions & also, what may become, "dead-time" - if an appeal is successful then you have to legislate what happens to the time already elapsed. You can't allow the game to continue for a further 5 minutes while you wait for a natural stop in play - you may have to "replay" this 5 minutes again - multiply this by 4 appeals & you're looking at an extra 20 minutes of playing time.
I will respond no more, regardless after this.
So, one last time for the Bore Me Troll clutching his bridge sat right at the back, in the Cheap Seats on his own...
In my book, under my suggestion there are TWO eyes on the pitch watching shit. the Captain, on the pitch. The Manager (& staff) off it. This has the potential to have all the pitch area covered for incidents. In REAL time, there would be 3/ 4 secs to lodge a 'challenge', 5 at the most to review non bird/ spaceship action. It doesn't fooking matter what subsequently happens after. If a goal is scored within that frame and the review proves nought, you lose a 'challenge' and the goal stands.
How does one indicate a 'challenge'? Who gives a fook?? Capt makes a 'T' shape to the 4th official or ref, if he can see. The Manager sends a lacky over to the 4th O. They both do the Meringue shooting flares up in to the sky!! Fooking semantics and can be worked out. Only you make up this '20 mins', again plucked from your arse! So, that's 2 'challenges' per team sorted with just a few secs/ mins needed.
It's IMPOSSIBLE for the ball not to go over the 'dead' line regardless of 'theory'. In 'theory' we can bend time, so now what? There have been NUMEROUS games when fouls, throw ins and subs have happened and the ref will blow 2 or 3 secs after half time/ full time. It's up to him. There is no law saying he MUST add on time. As long as the legitimate minutes have been played, everything else is negotiable within reason.
Therefore, in 'theory' he can absorb the reviews into the game IF any rules permit. It can still be worked out.
All your stupid questions answered.
Laters, Chump.
Login
Register
FAQ
