@glasshalffull said:
What should have been a joyful reflection on the night fans finally returned to Adams Park has turned into a character assassination of one of our own players.
Did I say there were rules? It has been discussed at great length, more than any other aspect of last night’s game, so I think it’s time to let the matter rest for now. That is assuming I have your permission to express an opinion.
@glasshalffull said:
You are actually questioning whether someone has permission to ask someone else for permission to express an opinion. I will leave it at that.
I've long been an advocate of changing the cards to be something like the following:
Green cards for minor mis-demeanours e.g. kicking the ball away. 2 greens = a yellow and off you go for 15 minutes.
Yellow cards for cynical professional fouls, swearing at the ref and clear diving in the attacking third = 15 minutes in the bin.
Red cards - off you go.
I'd also like to see goalkeepers obviously wasting time at goal kicks, the goal kick is switched to a corner.
I feel the threat of 15 minutes in the bin and the switch to a corner will improve players behaviour and you'd rarely see ref abuse and time wasting goalkeepers.
There was something so very wanton and wholly devoid of sporting spirit about the two rugby tackles on our players in that recent game against ? that made me feel that a yellow card, though the warranted response per the rules, was not a reasonable or sufficient penalty. I could live with the idea of a sin bin, as @commoner suggests.
Who is getting kicked off the Gasroom? Is it @glasshalffull for being maniacally positive about everything and everyone or is it someone else for being less positive about players? Whose opinion is being stifled or cut out? If its no-one can we stop accusing each other of preventing opinions being aired...I've got votes to count in Georgia.
@Wendoverman said:
Who is getting kicked off the Gasroom? Is it @glasshalffull for being maniacally positive about everything and everyone or is it someone else for being less positive about players? Whose opinion is being stifled or cut out? If its no-one can we stop accusing each other of preventing opinions being aired...I've got votes to count in Georgia.
No rush. I’m still filling in the last few thousand.
@Wendoverman said:
Who is getting kicked off the Gasroom? Is it @glasshalffull for being maniacally positive about everything and everyone or is it someone else for being less positive about players? Whose opinion is being stifled or cut out? If its no-one can we stop accusing each other of preventing opinions being aired...I've got votes to count in Georgia.
No rush. I’m still filling in the last few thousand.
@Wendoverman said:
Who is getting kicked off the Gasroom? Is it @glasshalffull for being maniacally positive about everything and everyone or is it someone else for being less positive about players? Whose opinion is being stifled or cut out? If its no-one can we stop accusing each other of preventing opinions being aired...I've got votes to count in Georgia.
No rush. I’m still filling in the last few thousand.
Surely you mean ensuring ballots were legally cast?
@LX1 said:
For me the worst dive is one where the attacking team had an excellent chance to score if the diver had stayed on his feet.
Which is what happened last night with Samuel from my viewpoint. The keeper came charging out of his goal when he didn't need to, and wasn't favourite to get the ball. Samuel got there first and could have got the ball into the box/edge of box leaving a keeperless goal to aim at. You could see their defenders desperately trying to get back on the line, and must have been overjoyed to see Samuel make such a terrible decision.
In fact I was at that end and, due to the limited crowd, heard one shout "EY oop me duck, what the bloody hell is he doing now!"
That’s a pretty unusual reaction from one of their players @LX1. They are usually a bit more clipped than that. And a Yorkshireman by the sound of it.
@Wendoverman said:
Who is getting kicked off the Gasroom? Is it @glasshalffull for being maniacally positive about everything and everyone or is it someone else for being less positive about players? Whose opinion is being stifled or cut out? If its no-one can we stop accusing each other of preventing opinions being aired...I've got votes to count in Georgia.
No rush. I’m still filling in the last few thousand.
Surely you mean ensuring ballots were legally cast?
@fame_46 said
Nice idea in principle, but if players start getting sin binned the game will start to get very boring. Tactically managers will get players to sit deep with 10 players for 15 mins and play direct countering attacking.
You could feasibly end up watching 45 mins of sin bin football without teams entering the opposition half.
Sometimes it could end up being a little boring but other times it may make the difference.
The alternative is to change the rules and actually send players off for tackles that were made deliberately to stop attacks e.g. Horgan being brought down recently when we had a 3 v 2.
In that Horgan incident no attempt was made to play the ball and you could argue it stopped the prospect of a goal scoring opportunity. If players new it was a red card rather than yellow they wouldn’t make the tackle.
We had a whole thread discussing sin-bins etc, in the past @Commoner and I stand by my suggestion from back then that replacing yellow cards with a quadruple vodka will help keep the entertainment value high.
Failing that, I quite like your suggested rule changes.
@Wendoverman said:
Who is getting kicked off the Gasroom? Is it @glasshalffull for being maniacally positive about everything and everyone or is it someone else for being less positive about players? Whose opinion is being stifled or cut out? If its no-one can we stop accusing each other of preventing opinions being aired...I've got votes to count in Georgia.
No rush. I’m still filling in the last few thousand.
Surely you mean ensuring ballots were legally cast?
Potato, potahto.
Tomahto, tomato, etc..... let’s call the whole thing off (George Gershwin song) - for anyone puzzled by @HCblue’s witticism.
@drcongo said:
We had a whole thread discussing sin-bins etc, in the past @Commoner and I stand by my suggestion from back then that replacing yellow cards with a quadruple vodka will help keep the entertainment value high.
Failing that, I quite like your suggested rule changes.
Maybe that's a good way to increase the entertainment value. Remove yellow cards for time wasting goalkeepers and instead they have to down a pint or do a couple of shots of Mezcal!
Same for outfield players with a cynical foul, could get quite lively!
The problem with sin bins is refs get all dictatorial with them and players then can't question anything. Abuse needs stamping out, but there should be some communication between the two.
@chairboyscentral said:
The problem with sin bins is refs get all dictatorial with them and players then can't question anything. Abuse needs stamping out, but there should be some communication between the two.
To be honest, if the way managers & players spoke to the referee, intimidated the referee and criticised the ref before, during & after his/her performance in any normal working environment they'd be sacked or severely reprimanded. I've never understood how this behaviour has been continued to be allowed in football. The Media then stoking it up is even more of a problem.
There needs to be a sweeping change in behaviour by all club staff, media and fans to stop blaming the officials for costing them matches.
The way some children & their coaches abuse officials on a sunday morning in local leagues all stems from what they see on TV, it's disgusting and really needs to stop.
Referees will make mistakes, they are human but the abuse & criticism they get would not be tolerated in other working environments. Players also make mistakes. Making a mistake needs to be made acceptable again in football.
One thing rugby has got right is the respect for the referee and how the captain can approach, query the decision and then move on even if the view of the decision is different.
The problems with sin bins is not the refs getting dictatorial it's the players refusing to accept the decision and then making a scene. The ref is in charge and their decision is final. They may occasionally make a mistake but the main issue is most footballers are conditioned to cheat, lie & question every decision made by the ref.
I'm very happy for the captain to ask the referee why he has given that decision, once he understands he needs to accept it and get on with the game.
They tried dissent being punished with moving a freekick forward and it was so rubbish they quickly scrapped it.
I could see sinbins quickly leading to an absolute raft of time wasting and negative football. You couldn't blame teams really as it's such a disadvantage!
The yellow and red card system works pretty well for me - the issue is the applying of rules. Which would simply move to the sin bin idea - as refs would no doubt apply that as awkwardly as they do the cards - why do we think they'd suddenly use it brilliantly?
There are a few issues with yellow/reds such as the ability to get a yellow for something very trivial versus almost smashing someone into next week getting the same.
But that'd be the same with sinbins. A ref may give a player the sinbin for tapping the ball 5 yards or for being 1% off a red.
I agree that refs clearly don't deserve the hard time they get, but they do get away with too much. The complete lack of accountability/transparency is what really grates. It's difficult, but if there was a way for them to explain decisions publicly, that would help.
I fear with the climate of online abuse that grows year on year the chances of a ref coming out to explain his decisions are pretty slim. You don't really need to give the trolls any more ammo. There was a period where dissent was being liberally dealt with with yellow cards, only the captain could talk to the ref and and the respect agenda came in...but that has certainly faded given the shouting in the face of the officials we have started to see on the rise again.
'Celebrity refs' don't help the cause. Mark Clattenburg basically admitted that he wanted to steal the show in the 2016 Cup final (Palace v United). Mike Dean, entertaining though he can be, clearly loves being the centre of attention as well. As do too many of them in the lower leagues.
I must admit, we can argue about decisions, but I've been quite impressed with the referees on the whole. Games flow, they seem to be confident in their decision making and less likely to be conned (by either side). Having said that I'm watching with a decent view of the action on the telly, perhaps in the grounds it does not seem that way.
IMHO, the best ref of recent times was Pierluigi Collina. It appeared to me he had a good communication line with the players and one glare from those eyeballs was enough to deter any approaching tornado!
I do feel sorry for three officials having to keep an eye on 15-18 players in the box at corners, they are bound to miss stuff.
It would be great if we had TV officials at games, and the ref asked questions like:
"Is there any reason I cannot award that goal"
They can have a dialogue between each other, viewed on the big screen like in the rugby, and a final decision made. If Rugby League can afford to do this for the last 20 years then I'm sure we could do something with football.
I feel the Watford goal would have stood and would have been 50/50 on the Millwall goal. Goalkeepers definitely get too much protection nowadays. Norwich free-kick would probably not have been given.
Overall I think the refs this season have been pretty good, even though we've had the rough end of a few decisions which could have gone either way.
@FmG said:
Along the subject of cheating...how would people have felt if Bloomfield had "taken one for the team" in the attack which lead to their goal. It was a dangerous break forming (obviously because they scored from it!) and Blooms just stuck out a soft arm to try to stop their player getting past. Personally I'd have liked to have seen a bit of a tactical foul to stop the attack. He would have been booked but they wouldn't have scored. Where would that be on the spectrum of cheating?? Worse than diving?
A tactical foul such as that which you suggest Blooms should have committed is not cheating. It is an accepted part of the game, frustrating as it can be to be on the receiving end of. No one is attempting to trick or deceive anyone, it is clear exactly what has taken place and you are punished according to the laws of the game. Diving is cheating, because you are attempting to deceive an official into awarding a decision in your favour as a consequence of a foul that wasn't actually committed.
I am very much in favour of a tactical foul when a team is on the break. I don't think we do it anywhere near enough. Wednesday was a perfect example of us clearly being in massive trouble on the break. I called it as the moment we were going to concede, and from what I've read on here plenty of others did too. I guess it's trickier to see the full picture from on the pitch, but so often the obvious and correct decision to make is to take the yellow card and regroup. Obviously there are caveats around being on a card already, game state, etc.
Comments
Not true.
Did I say there were rules? It has been discussed at great length, more than any other aspect of last night’s game, so I think it’s time to let the matter rest for now. That is assuming I have your permission to express an opinion.
That would depend on whether anyone else has your permission to express theirs. If so, your post becomes moot.
Hoist, petard etc.
You are actually questioning whether someone has permission to ask someone else for permission to express an opinion. I will leave it at that.
Also not true.
I've long been an advocate of changing the cards to be something like the following:
Green cards for minor mis-demeanours e.g. kicking the ball away. 2 greens = a yellow and off you go for 15 minutes.
Yellow cards for cynical professional fouls, swearing at the ref and clear diving in the attacking third = 15 minutes in the bin.
Red cards - off you go.
I'd also like to see goalkeepers obviously wasting time at goal kicks, the goal kick is switched to a corner.
I feel the threat of 15 minutes in the bin and the switch to a corner will improve players behaviour and you'd rarely see ref abuse and time wasting goalkeepers.
There was something so very wanton and wholly devoid of sporting spirit about the two rugby tackles on our players in that recent game against ? that made me feel that a yellow card, though the warranted response per the rules, was not a reasonable or sufficient penalty. I could live with the idea of a sin bin, as @commoner suggests.
Who is getting kicked off the Gasroom? Is it @glasshalffull for being maniacally positive about everything and everyone or is it someone else for being less positive about players? Whose opinion is being stifled or cut out? If its no-one can we stop accusing each other of preventing opinions being aired...I've got votes to count in Georgia.
No rush. I’m still filling in the last few thousand.
Superb witticism! Made my evening.
Surely you mean ensuring ballots were legally cast?
That’s a pretty unusual reaction from one of their players @LX1. They are usually a bit more clipped than that. And a Yorkshireman by the sound of it.
Potato, potahto.
Sometimes it could end up being a little boring but other times it may make the difference.
The alternative is to change the rules and actually send players off for tackles that were made deliberately to stop attacks e.g. Horgan being brought down recently when we had a 3 v 2.
In that Horgan incident no attempt was made to play the ball and you could argue it stopped the prospect of a goal scoring opportunity. If players new it was a red card rather than yellow they wouldn’t make the tackle.
We had a whole thread discussing sin-bins etc, in the past @Commoner and I stand by my suggestion from back then that replacing yellow cards with a quadruple vodka will help keep the entertainment value high.
Failing that, I quite like your suggested rule changes.
Tomahto, tomato, etc..... let’s call the whole thing off (George Gershwin song) - for anyone puzzled by @HCblue’s witticism.
Maybe that's a good way to increase the entertainment value. Remove yellow cards for time wasting goalkeepers and instead they have to down a pint or do a couple of shots of Mezcal!
Same for outfield players with a cynical foul, could get quite lively!
The problem with sin bins is refs get all dictatorial with them and players then can't question anything. Abuse needs stamping out, but there should be some communication between the two.
To be honest, if the way managers & players spoke to the referee, intimidated the referee and criticised the ref before, during & after his/her performance in any normal working environment they'd be sacked or severely reprimanded. I've never understood how this behaviour has been continued to be allowed in football. The Media then stoking it up is even more of a problem.
There needs to be a sweeping change in behaviour by all club staff, media and fans to stop blaming the officials for costing them matches.
The way some children & their coaches abuse officials on a sunday morning in local leagues all stems from what they see on TV, it's disgusting and really needs to stop.
Referees will make mistakes, they are human but the abuse & criticism they get would not be tolerated in other working environments. Players also make mistakes. Making a mistake needs to be made acceptable again in football.
One thing rugby has got right is the respect for the referee and how the captain can approach, query the decision and then move on even if the view of the decision is different.
The problems with sin bins is not the refs getting dictatorial it's the players refusing to accept the decision and then making a scene. The ref is in charge and their decision is final. They may occasionally make a mistake but the main issue is most footballers are conditioned to cheat, lie & question every decision made by the ref.
I'm very happy for the captain to ask the referee why he has given that decision, once he understands he needs to accept it and get on with the game.
They tried dissent being punished with moving a freekick forward and it was so rubbish they quickly scrapped it.
I could see sinbins quickly leading to an absolute raft of time wasting and negative football. You couldn't blame teams really as it's such a disadvantage!
The yellow and red card system works pretty well for me - the issue is the applying of rules. Which would simply move to the sin bin idea - as refs would no doubt apply that as awkwardly as they do the cards - why do we think they'd suddenly use it brilliantly?
There are a few issues with yellow/reds such as the ability to get a yellow for something very trivial versus almost smashing someone into next week getting the same.
But that'd be the same with sinbins. A ref may give a player the sinbin for tapping the ball 5 yards or for being 1% off a red.
I agree that refs clearly don't deserve the hard time they get, but they do get away with too much. The complete lack of accountability/transparency is what really grates. It's difficult, but if there was a way for them to explain decisions publicly, that would help.
I fear with the climate of online abuse that grows year on year the chances of a ref coming out to explain his decisions are pretty slim. You don't really need to give the trolls any more ammo. There was a period where dissent was being liberally dealt with with yellow cards, only the captain could talk to the ref and and the respect agenda came in...but that has certainly faded given the shouting in the face of the officials we have started to see on the rise again.
I refuse to stop blaming refs for some of our early season results.
'Celebrity refs' don't help the cause. Mark Clattenburg basically admitted that he wanted to steal the show in the 2016 Cup final (Palace v United). Mike Dean, entertaining though he can be, clearly loves being the centre of attention as well. As do too many of them in the lower leagues.
I must admit, we can argue about decisions, but I've been quite impressed with the referees on the whole. Games flow, they seem to be confident in their decision making and less likely to be conned (by either side). Having said that I'm watching with a decent view of the action on the telly, perhaps in the grounds it does not seem that way.
IMHO, the best ref of recent times was Pierluigi Collina. It appeared to me he had a good communication line with the players and one glare from those eyeballs was enough to deter any approaching tornado!
I do feel sorry for three officials having to keep an eye on 15-18 players in the box at corners, they are bound to miss stuff.
It would be great if we had TV officials at games, and the ref asked questions like:
"Is there any reason I cannot award that goal"
They can have a dialogue between each other, viewed on the big screen like in the rugby, and a final decision made. If Rugby League can afford to do this for the last 20 years then I'm sure we could do something with football.
I feel the Watford goal would have stood and would have been 50/50 on the Millwall goal. Goalkeepers definitely get too much protection nowadays. Norwich free-kick would probably not have been given.
Overall I think the refs this season have been pretty good, even though we've had the rough end of a few decisions which could have gone either way.
A tactical foul such as that which you suggest Blooms should have committed is not cheating. It is an accepted part of the game, frustrating as it can be to be on the receiving end of. No one is attempting to trick or deceive anyone, it is clear exactly what has taken place and you are punished according to the laws of the game. Diving is cheating, because you are attempting to deceive an official into awarding a decision in your favour as a consequence of a foul that wasn't actually committed.
I am very much in favour of a tactical foul when a team is on the break. I don't think we do it anywhere near enough. Wednesday was a perfect example of us clearly being in massive trouble on the break. I called it as the moment we were going to concede, and from what I've read on here plenty of others did too. I guess it's trickier to see the full picture from on the pitch, but so often the obvious and correct decision to make is to take the yellow card and regroup. Obviously there are caveats around being on a card already, game state, etc.