Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
UsFansKnowNowt said:
If a player is tripped in the box he gets a direct free kick from the place he's tripped. Given that he's not getting a free shot at goal penalty then a player is much less likely to just dive to the ground at the 1st hint of a contact as the reward is not so great.

A goal would only ever be awarded if the foul stopped a CERTAIN goal, i.e. the ball about to be kicked into an empty goal when the attacking player is fouled. Any other legitimate foul that was not a certain goal is a direct free kick.
Click to expand...
So to stop diving you’re going to NOT AWARD penalties for fouls in the area, not a goal but now a direct free kick?

You thought this through at all?

You’ve certainly got the award for ‘Most apt user name’ on Bluemoon.
 
UsFansKnowNowt said:
If a player is tripped in the box he gets a direct free kick from the place he's tripped. Given that he's not getting a free shot at goal penalty then a player is much less likely to just dive to the ground at the 1st hint of a contact as the reward is not so great.

A goal would only ever be awarded if the foul stopped a CERTAIN goal, i.e. the ball about to be kicked into an empty goal when the attacking player is fouled. Any other legitimate foul that was not a certain goal is a direct free kick.
Click to expand...
And the ref, along with VAR would only ever deem a goal to be 'certain' had the player about to score the 'certain' goal been clad in a red shirt. Nothing will change no matter how many times the LotG are tweeked, modified and amended. There will still be the option to 'judge' what happened, despite what the rest of us have seen!
 
Blue Mist said:
No you are missing the point. If you are offside and run back onside to receive the ball, as far as I understand it, you are still offside. That is what coutiniho did.
Click to expand...

Offside is decided when the ball was kicked forward. It is irrelevant that he was in an offside position before.
It was the wrong decision. He was very clearly onside.

However, I doubt Coutinho would have scored if the ref hadn't blown anyway.
 
Jordie said:
Coutinho was not offside.
Click to expand...
From the Tv pictures that true but, I've seen instances where the Tv will show a still that later the VAR cameras shows the opposite so, cant say for absolute certainty that he wasn't
For sure the lineman operated from muscle memory reverting back to pre VAR days and the ref blew both shouldn't have happened
 
Rochdale Blue said:
I think you mean tactical leg breaking, a bit like the tactical forearm smash to Kev's nose in the CL final. Obviously the rules concerning City differ from those governing everyone else.
Click to expand...
See the punishment the rags systematically dished out to Gabby J with zero condemnation from the impartial press, poor guy took more hits than Mrs Giggs (allegedly)
 
jaiguruKun said:
Offside is decided when the ball was kicked forward. It is irrelevant that he was in an offside position before.
It was the wrong decision. He was very clearly onside.

However, I doubt Coutinho would have scored if the ref hadn't blown anyway.
Click to expand...
He certainly looked onside when the ball was played - I think people are confused by the fact he came back to receive the ball, which was never an issue. Also, the ball doesn’t have to be going forward as a commentator said about Haaland’s hat trick goal last Wednesday (he can’t be offside because the ball was cut back). Haaland could still have been offside if he’d been beyond the ball when it was played and came back to meet it, which I feared at first sight was what had happened
 
I think the daftest thing about these offsides is when the free kick is given in the half where you can't be offside. It should be given at the point the player was caught offside and not where he ran to. What's to stop a player, offside in the oppo half, running back and getting the ball five yards outside his own penalty area. Could be done, and would the free kick be given where he received the ball or where he started being offside?
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
I think the daftest thing about these offsides is when the free kick is given in the half where you can't be offside. It should be given at the point the player was caught offside and not where he ran to. What's to stop a player, offside in the oppo half, running back and getting the ball five yards outside his own penalty area. Could be done, and would the free kick be given where he received the ball or where he started being offside?
Click to expand...
He's in an offside position when the ball is played, but not given offside until he plays the ball (or attempts to)
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
I think the daftest thing about these offsides is when the free kick is given in the half where you can't be offside. It should be given at the point the player was caught offside and not where he ran to. What's to stop a player, offside in the oppo half, running back and getting the ball five yards outside his own penalty area. Could be done, and would the free kick be given where he received the ball or where he started being offside?
Click to expand...

You’re right, I posted this a while back in “the rules in football you would change“ thread.
 
citizen_maine said:
He's in an offside position when the ball is played, but not given offside until he plays the ball (or attempts to)
Click to expand...
By which time he's in the the half his team are defending! It's crackers. The free kick should be hwere he was caught offside and not where he received the ball. If the free kick was inside the half the opposition are defending then it would at least give fans the idea that he was 'caught offside'. I've seen a free kick at the Etihad for offside placed in the half where you can't be offside. Just another example of IFAB getting themselves into a bit of a mess.
 
@twosips going off on Tariq Panja on Twitter after that NYTimes interview with Mbappe and I think he's spot on.

I don't think any of us should take a blind bit of notice of Tariq Panja. He had an hour with arguably the biggest global superstar in the sport, plays for a club owned by Qatar and 'didn't have time' to ask him any questions about Qatar and 'Sportswashing'.
 
MCFC1993 said:
@twosips going off on Tariq Panja on Twitter after that NYTimes interview with Mbappe and I think he's spot on.

I don't think any of us should take a blind bit of notice of Tariq Panja anymore. He had an hour with arguably the biggest global superstar in the sport, plays for a club owned by Qatar and 'didn't have time' to ask him any questions about Qatar and 'Sportswashing'.
Click to expand...

You think I ever took any notice of him. OUR owners and club give him the contempt he deserves.
They all hate being ignored, always been the best way.
 
And I quote:

scha·den·freu·de
/ˈSHädənˌfroidə/

noun
pleasure derived by someone from another person's misfortune.

"Enjoying watching Tariq Panja get absolutely fucking owned on Twitter for his utter chickenshittery regarding Mbappe and Qatar is the ultimate example of schadenfreude."
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top