General officiating/rules

[a m ole]

9 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

So apparently Wenger wants to replace throw-ins with ‘kick-ins’.

Why hasn’t this crusty old French **** retired yet? Seems to be on a one man mission to make football worse.

I generally quite like Wenger, but how would that not result in every team trying to Burnley or Stoke the game?

[il_serpente]

16 minutes ago, MrBlack said:

 

 

 

Like it matters. They'd come to the wrong conclusion anyway. Just one more way for them to favour the clubs they want to win.

Imagine the number of stoppages for VAR if they reviewed yellows.

[il_serpente]

9 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

So apparently Wenger wants to replace throw-ins with ‘kick-ins’.

Why hasn’t this crusty old French **** retired yet? Seems to be on a one man mission to make football worse.

They did this in my daughter's Under 8 league years ago because they figured half the throw-ins would be foul throws and the throwing team probably wouldn't benefit most of the time anyway on the ones that weren't foul.

With that said, Villa would probably benefit from this change more than any other team.   WDFAFTI!!!!

[sharkyvilla]

23 minutes ago, a m ole said:

I generally quite like Wenger, but how would that not result in every team trying to Burnley or Stoke the game?

I remember they trialled it in the Diadora league in the 90s and yes it just ended up with hoofball.  They had to signal they were taking a kick in with something that was remarkably similar to a Hitler salute.  My local team did an article on it not long ago.

https://www.horshamfc.co.uk/the-kick-in/

Quote

When is a throw-in not a throw-in? The question sounds like some obscure after-dinner conundrum and one that might have many of today’s younger football fans scratching their heads. Yet it was a very real poser for Horsham, and their fellow members of the Isthmian League, back in the 1994/5 season when the League, then sponsored by sportswear manufacturer Diadora, was invited to trial a controversial new initiative from FIFA. Having tried out the new ruling in Japan, the football world’s governing body were keen to experiment on a wider market so, along with the senior leagues in Belgium and Hungary, the Diadora League was to become the guinea pig in a season long ‘kick-in experiment’. Designed to add an extra dimension to attacking play, teams looking to return the ball from the touchline were given the option of taking either the conventional throw or, by the agreed signal of the raising of an arm, a kick in.

The proposal caused widespread controversy among coaches and the media, who were to give it thousands of column inches throughout the season, with many fearing an increase in the long ball tactic. It was so unpopular with some that one manager was reported to have forbidden his team to exercise the kick-in option, threatening to sack any player who did.

Opponents defending the kick-in were instructed to stand ten yards from the ball, and, if it were played back to the goalkeeper, he was prohibited from picking it up. The new rule was permitted only in Diadora League and League Cup matches which also added to the confusion for those clubs that were also competing in the FA Cup, FA Vase and various County Cup competitions who had to remember to apply the correct code.

Mark Lawford, sports reporter for the West Sussex County Times at the time, was outspoken in his criticism of the new project, fearing managers would select teams of giants to deal with the threatened aerial invasion. “Soon, all teams will field five seven foot defenders and three even taller attackers, while ‘keepers will probably have to duck just to avoid the floodlights”, he commented. “There is nothing pretty in watching the ball launched time after time from the touchline, whereas a long throw-in was a legitimate weapon. Kick-ins add nothing to the game as a spectacle”, he continued. “I can see why the back pass rule was brought in…..but whoever dreamed up the kick-in should be kicked out. It is a pointless, meaningless change which puts defenders in a real quandary under pressure. What I have seen so far is defensive minded teams simply having another chance to hoof the ball 60 yards.”

Horsham’s first success using this new method came in the October when Darren Freeman netted the side’s second goal in a 4-0 romp against Hornchurch but the Hornets were reluctant participants of the new ruling and, after FIFA had gathered the results of the questionnaire at the end of the season, the controversial kick-in was booted very firmly into touch, never to be seen again

 

[Wainy316]

As well as clear and obvious goals (lolz) VAR should be to correct easily spottable little things, such as a corner given when it should be a goal kick .

 

[PussEKatt]

On 15/06/2022 at 17:57, Wainy316 said:

As well as clear and obvious goals (lolz) VAR should be to correct easily spottable little things, such as a corner given when it should be a goal kick .

 

I agree wholehearted with thab,but I think there should be a bit of lllway in the offside rule ( as far as VAR goes ) I mean bieng ruled offside because your big toe was too far forward is a bit much.Its not as if football is a turn based game,is it ?

[ThunderPower_14]

4 minutes ago, PussEKatt said:

I agree wholehearted with thab,but I think there should be a bit of lllway in the offside rule ( as far as VAR goes ) I mean bieng ruled offside because your big toe was too far forward is a bit much.Its not as if football is a turn based game,is it ?

 

I think how VAR is used just needs to be changed entirely. Drawing lines? Horrible. It should be for clear and obvious errors. 

So what i'd do is have the VAR official tell the officiating referee that he needs to have another look, but not steer him in any specific direction about what he should be looking at. The officiating referee watches the replay on a screen where he gets to see the passage of play twice, at 2 different angles and at normal speed. The same system whether it's a red card, a penalty or an offside. No lines for offsides. If it's not clearly offside on viewing 2 replays, it's not offside enough.

[Villaphan04]

 

 

 

[WallisFrizz]

Granit Xhaka’s booking for time wasting vs Leeds when Arsenal were 4-1 up is being referred to the National Crime Agency re concerns around unusual betting.

[foreveryoung]

4 hours ago, WallisFrizz said:

Granit Xhaka’s booking for time wasting vs Leeds when Arsenal were 4-1 up is being referred to the National Crime Agency re concerns around unusual betting.

There'a a few of these about that don't get investigated. Ever seen a red card when your like, why ohh why would he do that??

[WallisFrizz]

33 minutes ago, foreveryoung said:

There'a a few of these about that don't get investigated. Ever seen a red card when your like, why ohh why would he do that??

They’re saying they’re not accusing him of any wrong doing but clearly (if there is wrong doing) it’s only him or the ref under suspicion.

[Zatman]

Granit Xhaka yellow card is one of the most common thing in football

[May-Z]

17 hours ago, foreveryoung said:

There'a a few of these about that don't get investigated. Ever seen a red card when your like, why ohh why would he do that??

Pretty much every time Xhaka plays!

[Villaphan04]

 

[Hornso]

Will not be missed. That Palace game still makes me angry. 

[Wainy316]

Friend, Moss and Dean all gone! 

I would celebrate this but I don't hold too much hope for their replacements.  They are the three I dread being given Villa games most though.

[villa4europe]

Sounds like they're going to try and fix at least part of the stupid offside rule

This where a defender deflecting a ball in to the path of an offside striker is deemed to be playing the ball is finally being put in the bin, it's reverting back to actually playing the ball as in playing a shit pass 

So Harry Kanes penalty vs Germany would be offside 

Common sense prevails - but its still changing the rules again and again and again so expect fans to be confused and moan about it next season 

[a m ole]

9 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Sounds like they're going to try and fix at least part of the stupid offside rule

This where a defender deflecting a ball in to the path of an offside striker is deemed to be playing the ball is finally being put in the bin, it's reverting back to actually playing the ball as in playing a shit pass 

So Harry Kanes penalty vs Germany would be offside 

Common sense prevails - but its still changing the rules again and again and again so expect fans to be confused and moan about it next season 

Always after we get **** by it.

[villa4europe]

2 hours ago, a m ole said:

Always after we get **** by it.

We didn't have one of those did we?

We had the mings one which changed the rule in the first place then I'm sure scored vs Newcastle thanks to it but can't remember a deflected by defender means onside being scored against us 

Edit - 

https://youtu.be/KOAG8A-Pf68

Watkins goal here is the one I'm thinking of, that will now (rightly) be offside 

Edited July 30, 2022 by villa4europe

[a m ole]

18 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

We didn't have one of those did we?

We had the mings one which changed the rule in the first place then I'm sure scored vs Newcastle thanks to it but can't remember a deflected by defender means onside being scored against us 

Edit - 

https://youtu.be/KOAG8A-Pf68

Watkins goal here is the one I'm thinking of, that will now (rightly) be offside 

There was one where a defender slid in, kicked the ball off another defender and it went to us and we scored but was ruled offside. It shouldn’t have been. However, reading again this rule doesn’t change that, they just implemented it wrong in the first place.