comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 3 minutes ago
If you're a striker in todays game, you're probably better off just aiming for the players arm who's right in front of you instead of the net. This farcical system will give you a pen.
The game is in disrepute.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Strikers are pretty inconsistent at hitting a massive, stationary target like a goal - don't think they would have too much success if they tried aiming just at arms.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 22 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
I think subjectivity is critical - most things in football require that because of the variables involved.
When we debated 'impeding' or 'pulling', for example, you tried to use the fact that the player had been pulled to justify it being a foul. The reality is that it is not that simple and it's possible to have a little pull at someone and not commit a foul.
The laws provide guidance for referees and they make a decision.
If that stopped happening then you'd effectively have a non contact sport imo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair contact doesn't involve pulling of any force. If you pull a player back, from behind as he advances through on goal, in the box, it's going to be a penalty. That doesn't make it a non-contact sport, you can still have fair contact.
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
You're wrong.
If you read and understand the laws of the game then it's not a yes or no.
Most fouls are subject to the careless, reckless and excessive force criteria.
Others have their own criteria, such as holding.
You were basically saying 'I don't need to read the law, a pull is a pull' and you were wrong.
It is subjective, and this is the issue. Many people don't understand that.
comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 22 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
I think subjectivity is critical - most things in football require that because of the variables involved.
When we debated 'impeding' or 'pulling', for example, you tried to use the fact that the player had been pulled to justify it being a foul. The reality is that it is not that simple and it's possible to have a little pull at someone and not commit a foul.
The laws provide guidance for referees and they make a decision.
If that stopped happening then you'd effectively have a non contact sport imo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair contact doesn't involve pulling of any force. If you pull a player back, from behind as he advances through on goal, in the box, it's going to be a penalty. That doesn't make it a non-contact sport, you can still have fair contact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think refs have been cracking down on pulling/pushing in the box after incidents of defenders basically rugby tackling when defending corners. Whether that means refs are being over zealous in awarding pens/free kicks I don’t know.
It was a thing in the WC last summer carried over to the league.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 23 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
You're wrong.
If you read and understand the laws of the game then it's not a yes or no.
Most fouls are subject to the careless, reckless and excessive force criteria.
Others have their own criteria, such as holding.
You were basically saying 'I don't need to read the law, a pull is a pull' and you were wrong.
It is subjective, and this is the issue. Many people don't understand that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law. I was basically saying that it was a foul according to a law. You believed I used the wrong law but you don't need to know which law is used to know when there is a foul. Do you think players read the laws? They still know what they can and can't do and they certainly know you can't pull players back, from behind when they are through on goal.
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
"I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law."
"but you don't need to know which law is used to know when there is a foul."
Sorry, but that's a clear contradiction.
Of course you need to know which law you're referring to in order to know if there has been a foul. Otherwise you don't know what the criteria for applying the law is.
To suggest that all players have an understanding of what they can and can't do is completely untrue - they will often argue things on the basis of a complete misunderstanding of the law.
The fact is that the Salah incident was not a yes or no question. It required application of a criteria regarding the relevant law.
That's not my opinion, it's a fact.
Jesus Christ is this the Winston and TOOR show? I appreciate debate, but fu** me the threads just been infested with you 2 arguing and bickering
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 3 minutes ago
Jesus Christ is this the Winston and TOOR show? I appreciate debate, but fu** me the threads just been infested with you 2 arguing and bickering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm doing my best for this not to be an argument or to involve bickering.
Posts like yours hardly help, do they?
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 3 minutes ago
Jesus Christ is this the Winston and TOOR show? I appreciate debate, but fu** me the threads just been infested with you 2 arguing and bickering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm doing my best for this not to be an argument or to involve bickering.
Posts like yours hardly help, do they?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well stop replying to him ffs. We have all established you 2 don’t get on and can’t stand eachother.
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 3 minutes ago
Jesus Christ is this the Winston and TOOR show? I appreciate debate, but fu** me the threads just been infested with you 2 arguing and bickering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm doing my best for this not to be an argument or to involve bickering.
Posts like yours hardly help, do they?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well stop replying to him ffs. We have all established you 2 don’t get on and can’t stand eachother.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would I stop replying? I enjoy the debate.
You're the one with the issue, so I'd politely suggest you stop reading it.
I see Mo Daley escaped a red card and Pool escaped a similar penalty to City`s against Porto, so much for consistency with VAR.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 3 hours, 46 minutes ago
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 3 minutes ago
If you're a striker in todays game, you're probably better off just aiming for the players arm who's right in front of you instead of the net. This farcical system will give you a pen.
The game is in disrepute.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Strikers are pretty inconsistent at hitting a massive, stationary target like a goal - don't think they would have too much success if they tried aiming just at arms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If a defender is right in front of you, a striker need only dink the ball at him from a yard away. Throw your hands up and shout penalty and wait for VAR to do the rest.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 55 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
"I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law."
"but you don't need to know which law is used to know when there is a foul."
Sorry, but that's a clear contradiction.
Of course you need to know which law you're referring to in order to know if there has been a foul. Otherwise you don't know what the criteria for applying the law is.
To suggest that all players have an understanding of what they can and can't do is completely untrue - they will often argue things on the basis of a complete misunderstanding of the law.
The fact is that the Salah incident was not a yes or no question. It required application of a criteria regarding the relevant law.
That's not my opinion, it's a fact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You don't need to know which law you are referring to, just that it's a foul. I would bet most players don't know what laws are used when they're fouled. They just know what they can and can't do.
I can accept it requires application of the criteria of the law but also that it comes down to if he pulled him back from behind whilst he was heading towards goal, in the box. He did, so a penalty was given.
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 25 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 3 hours, 46 minutes ago
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 3 minutes ago
If you're a striker in todays game, you're probably better off just aiming for the players arm who's right in front of you instead of the net. This farcical system will give you a pen.
The game is in disrepute.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Strikers are pretty inconsistent at hitting a massive, stationary target like a goal - don't think they would have too much success if they tried aiming just at arms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If a defender is right in front of you, a striker need only dink the ball at him from a yard away. Throw your hands up and shout penalty and wait for VAR to do the rest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't be given as handball though. Unless the defender has his arms away from his body in a way that will block the progression of the ball.
Distance from the ball and if it is unexpected is also taken into account.
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
If you don't know which law it refers to, how do you know the criteria referees are advised to use in order to decide if it's a foul?
"but also that it comes down to if he pulled him back from behind whilst he was heading towards goal"
Those words do not appear in the laws so no, it's not that simple.
As I said earlier - you do not understand the laws and you're just making things up.
"They just know what they can and can't do."
Thinking they know and actually knowing are two entirely different things.
Which is why a lot of complaints from players and comments from fans, like you, are wrong.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
If you don't know which law it refers to, how do you know the criteria referees are advised to use in order to decide if it's a foul?
"but also that it comes down to if he pulled him back from behind whilst he was heading towards goal"
Those words do not appear in the laws so no, it's not that simple.
As I said earlier - you do not understand the laws and you're just making things up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes those words aren't used in the laws, they're just used by people who play the game and watch it. People don't need rule books and the rules applied to fouls to know when they see a foul. Players don't run about the pitch with a rule book in their hand and refer to it once they've been fouled.
Your mistake here and the one you make in the VAR handballs is not having it spelt out to you so you can read it and therefore not being able to apply it to real life. Unfortunately for you, real life doesn't work like that. People apply their experience and opinions to things, using what they know. Everybody doesn't need everything spelled out in black and white for them.
"People don't need rule books and the rules applied to fouls to know when they see a foul"
No, TOOR.
The decision as to whether an incident is a foul is made based on the laws.
Simply put, if you don't know the law, you are in no position to debate the decision.
Keep dressing up all you like - there's no way out. You can only have a credible opinion regarding that Salah incident if you know the laws.
Your comments like "it comes down to if he pulled him back from behind whilst he was heading towards goal, in the box. He did, so a penalty was given" are incorrect.
They're incorrect because you don't know the law.
Thanks for the indisputable evidence that you don't understand the laws and so when you give your opinion, it's lacking any credibility
comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 11 minutes ago
Jesus Winston, I’ve just come back on here having last looked at Ja this morn and see you and TOOR have been having the same trivial argument all day long.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All day long?
Yeh, okay mate.
"I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law."
"People don't need rule books and the rules applied to fouls to know when they see a foul."
Unfortunately you'll never understand as you have to have everything spelt out in front of you. This is why you can't understand why VAR is giving penalties for handballs which aren't spelt out. You use the words 'guidance' and 'judgement based on criteria set out' etc. but you fail to follow what you say. It's not black and white enough for you, you can't look it up in the dictionary. Your understanding of what is intentional in regards to handball, highlights this.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 20 minutes ago
"I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law."
"People don't need rule books and the rules applied to fouls to know when they see a foul."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes?
comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 18 minutes ago
Unfortunately you'll never understand as you have to have everything spelt out in front of you. This is why you can't understand why VAR is giving penalties for handballs which aren't spelt out. You use the words 'guidance' and 'judgement based on criteria set out' etc. but you fail to follow what you say. It's not black and white enough for you, you can't look it up in the dictionary. Your understanding of what is intentional in regards to handball, highlights this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Said without a hint of irony.
You’re the one who goes by dictionary definitions and not the actual laws.
You’re the one who thinks it’s a yes or no answer.
You’re actually describing yourself.
Factbis, you need to know the laws to debate whether a decision is correct.
To argue otherwise is absurd.
Oh and those quotes are a huge contradiction. But you’ll deny it because you never admit you made a mistake.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree and settle on that I, along with FIFA, UEFA and the referes don't understand the laws but you do.
Sign in if you want to comment
VAR - loads of s***
Page 5 of 11
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 3 minutes ago
If you're a striker in todays game, you're probably better off just aiming for the players arm who's right in front of you instead of the net. This farcical system will give you a pen.
The game is in disrepute.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Strikers are pretty inconsistent at hitting a massive, stationary target like a goal - don't think they would have too much success if they tried aiming just at arms.
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 22 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
I think subjectivity is critical - most things in football require that because of the variables involved.
When we debated 'impeding' or 'pulling', for example, you tried to use the fact that the player had been pulled to justify it being a foul. The reality is that it is not that simple and it's possible to have a little pull at someone and not commit a foul.
The laws provide guidance for referees and they make a decision.
If that stopped happening then you'd effectively have a non contact sport imo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair contact doesn't involve pulling of any force. If you pull a player back, from behind as he advances through on goal, in the box, it's going to be a penalty. That doesn't make it a non-contact sport, you can still have fair contact.
posted on 10/4/19
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
You're wrong.
If you read and understand the laws of the game then it's not a yes or no.
Most fouls are subject to the careless, reckless and excessive force criteria.
Others have their own criteria, such as holding.
You were basically saying 'I don't need to read the law, a pull is a pull' and you were wrong.
It is subjective, and this is the issue. Many people don't understand that.
posted on 10/4/19
comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 22 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
I think subjectivity is critical - most things in football require that because of the variables involved.
When we debated 'impeding' or 'pulling', for example, you tried to use the fact that the player had been pulled to justify it being a foul. The reality is that it is not that simple and it's possible to have a little pull at someone and not commit a foul.
The laws provide guidance for referees and they make a decision.
If that stopped happening then you'd effectively have a non contact sport imo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair contact doesn't involve pulling of any force. If you pull a player back, from behind as he advances through on goal, in the box, it's going to be a penalty. That doesn't make it a non-contact sport, you can still have fair contact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think refs have been cracking down on pulling/pushing in the box after incidents of defenders basically rugby tackling when defending corners. Whether that means refs are being over zealous in awarding pens/free kicks I don’t know.
It was a thing in the WC last summer carried over to the league.
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 23 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
You're wrong.
If you read and understand the laws of the game then it's not a yes or no.
Most fouls are subject to the careless, reckless and excessive force criteria.
Others have their own criteria, such as holding.
You were basically saying 'I don't need to read the law, a pull is a pull' and you were wrong.
It is subjective, and this is the issue. Many people don't understand that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law. I was basically saying that it was a foul according to a law. You believed I used the wrong law but you don't need to know which law is used to know when there is a foul. Do you think players read the laws? They still know what they can and can't do and they certainly know you can't pull players back, from behind when they are through on goal.
posted on 10/4/19
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
"I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law."
"but you don't need to know which law is used to know when there is a foul."
Sorry, but that's a clear contradiction.
Of course you need to know which law you're referring to in order to know if there has been a foul. Otherwise you don't know what the criteria for applying the law is.
To suggest that all players have an understanding of what they can and can't do is completely untrue - they will often argue things on the basis of a complete misunderstanding of the law.
The fact is that the Salah incident was not a yes or no question. It required application of a criteria regarding the relevant law.
That's not my opinion, it's a fact.
posted on 10/4/19
Jesus Christ is this the Winston and TOOR show? I appreciate debate, but fu** me the threads just been infested with you 2 arguing and bickering
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 3 minutes ago
Jesus Christ is this the Winston and TOOR show? I appreciate debate, but fu** me the threads just been infested with you 2 arguing and bickering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm doing my best for this not to be an argument or to involve bickering.
Posts like yours hardly help, do they?
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 3 minutes ago
Jesus Christ is this the Winston and TOOR show? I appreciate debate, but fu** me the threads just been infested with you 2 arguing and bickering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm doing my best for this not to be an argument or to involve bickering.
Posts like yours hardly help, do they?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well stop replying to him ffs. We have all established you 2 don’t get on and can’t stand eachother.
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Don_tottenham (U3372)
posted 3 minutes ago
Jesus Christ is this the Winston and TOOR show? I appreciate debate, but fu** me the threads just been infested with you 2 arguing and bickering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm doing my best for this not to be an argument or to involve bickering.
Posts like yours hardly help, do they?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well stop replying to him ffs. We have all established you 2 don’t get on and can’t stand eachother.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why would I stop replying? I enjoy the debate.
You're the one with the issue, so I'd politely suggest you stop reading it.
posted on 10/4/19
I see Mo Daley escaped a red card and Pool escaped a similar penalty to City`s against Porto, so much for consistency with VAR.
posted on 10/4/19
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 3 hours, 46 minutes ago
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 3 minutes ago
If you're a striker in todays game, you're probably better off just aiming for the players arm who's right in front of you instead of the net. This farcical system will give you a pen.
The game is in disrepute.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Strikers are pretty inconsistent at hitting a massive, stationary target like a goal - don't think they would have too much success if they tried aiming just at arms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If a defender is right in front of you, a striker need only dink the ball at him from a yard away. Throw your hands up and shout penalty and wait for VAR to do the rest.
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 55 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
"I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law."
"but you don't need to know which law is used to know when there is a foul."
Sorry, but that's a clear contradiction.
Of course you need to know which law you're referring to in order to know if there has been a foul. Otherwise you don't know what the criteria for applying the law is.
To suggest that all players have an understanding of what they can and can't do is completely untrue - they will often argue things on the basis of a complete misunderstanding of the law.
The fact is that the Salah incident was not a yes or no question. It required application of a criteria regarding the relevant law.
That's not my opinion, it's a fact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You don't need to know which law you are referring to, just that it's a foul. I would bet most players don't know what laws are used when they're fouled. They just know what they can and can't do.
I can accept it requires application of the criteria of the law but also that it comes down to if he pulled him back from behind whilst he was heading towards goal, in the box. He did, so a penalty was given.
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 25 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 3 hours, 46 minutes ago
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 3 minutes ago
If you're a striker in todays game, you're probably better off just aiming for the players arm who's right in front of you instead of the net. This farcical system will give you a pen.
The game is in disrepute.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Strikers are pretty inconsistent at hitting a massive, stationary target like a goal - don't think they would have too much success if they tried aiming just at arms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If a defender is right in front of you, a striker need only dink the ball at him from a yard away. Throw your hands up and shout penalty and wait for VAR to do the rest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't be given as handball though. Unless the defender has his arms away from his body in a way that will block the progression of the ball.
Distance from the ball and if it is unexpected is also taken into account.
posted on 10/4/19
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
If you don't know which law it refers to, how do you know the criteria referees are advised to use in order to decide if it's a foul?
"but also that it comes down to if he pulled him back from behind whilst he was heading towards goal"
Those words do not appear in the laws so no, it's not that simple.
As I said earlier - you do not understand the laws and you're just making things up.
posted on 10/4/19
"They just know what they can and can't do."
Thinking they know and actually knowing are two entirely different things.
Which is why a lot of complaints from players and comments from fans, like you, are wrong.
posted on 10/4/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 minutes ago
TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
If you don't know which law it refers to, how do you know the criteria referees are advised to use in order to decide if it's a foul?
"but also that it comes down to if he pulled him back from behind whilst he was heading towards goal"
Those words do not appear in the laws so no, it's not that simple.
As I said earlier - you do not understand the laws and you're just making things up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes those words aren't used in the laws, they're just used by people who play the game and watch it. People don't need rule books and the rules applied to fouls to know when they see a foul. Players don't run about the pitch with a rule book in their hand and refer to it once they've been fouled.
Your mistake here and the one you make in the VAR handballs is not having it spelt out to you so you can read it and therefore not being able to apply it to real life. Unfortunately for you, real life doesn't work like that. People apply their experience and opinions to things, using what they know. Everybody doesn't need everything spelled out in black and white for them.
posted on 10/4/19
"People don't need rule books and the rules applied to fouls to know when they see a foul"
No, TOOR.
The decision as to whether an incident is a foul is made based on the laws.
Simply put, if you don't know the law, you are in no position to debate the decision.
Keep dressing up all you like - there's no way out. You can only have a credible opinion regarding that Salah incident if you know the laws.
Your comments like "it comes down to if he pulled him back from behind whilst he was heading towards goal, in the box. He did, so a penalty was given" are incorrect.
They're incorrect because you don't know the law.
Thanks for the indisputable evidence that you don't understand the laws and so when you give your opinion, it's lacking any credibility
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 11 minutes ago
Jesus Winston, I’ve just come back on here having last looked at Ja this morn and see you and TOOR have been having the same trivial argument all day long.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All day long?
Yeh, okay mate.
posted on 10/4/19
"I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law."
"People don't need rule books and the rules applied to fouls to know when they see a foul."
posted on 10/4/19
Unfortunately you'll never understand as you have to have everything spelt out in front of you. This is why you can't understand why VAR is giving penalties for handballs which aren't spelt out. You use the words 'guidance' and 'judgement based on criteria set out' etc. but you fail to follow what you say. It's not black and white enough for you, you can't look it up in the dictionary. Your understanding of what is intentional in regards to handball, highlights this.
posted on 10/4/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 20 minutes ago
"I wasn't basically saying I don't need to read the law."
"People don't need rule books and the rules applied to fouls to know when they see a foul."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes?
posted on 10/4/19
comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 18 minutes ago
Unfortunately you'll never understand as you have to have everything spelt out in front of you. This is why you can't understand why VAR is giving penalties for handballs which aren't spelt out. You use the words 'guidance' and 'judgement based on criteria set out' etc. but you fail to follow what you say. It's not black and white enough for you, you can't look it up in the dictionary. Your understanding of what is intentional in regards to handball, highlights this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Said without a hint of irony.
You’re the one who goes by dictionary definitions and not the actual laws.
You’re the one who thinks it’s a yes or no answer.
You’re actually describing yourself.
Factbis, you need to know the laws to debate whether a decision is correct.
To argue otherwise is absurd.
Oh and those quotes are a huge contradiction. But you’ll deny it because you never admit you made a mistake.
posted on 10/4/19
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree and settle on that I, along with FIFA, UEFA and the referes don't understand the laws but you do.
Page 5 of 11
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10