Football has lost the plot

T

t4tomo

Well-known member
So its a contact sport, you can get away with a pretty hefty shoulder to shoulder hit, and within reason, if you get a slight tough on the ball, provided you keep your studs down, you can wipe out your opponent.
You can also play rugby / tag wrestling in dead ball situations before the ball is kicked

However if you so much micro touch someone without playing the ball then its fair game for them to collapse under the stress of a "3 gram" touch to "win" a foul
and if you brush someones toe as you both try to kick the ball then that's equivalent of assault.


absolute madness, the game has gone....

discuss...
 
a number of these VAR incidents the referee has been stood about 3m-5m away with a clear view and gives nothing. Then VAR look at in ultra slow motion, see the tiniest bit of contact and call him to the screen. He then goes to screen and does what he is told so what is the point.
Accidental stepping on someones toe, player goes down and rolls around and around (usually holding the shin) until VAR decide to look at it and deem it a foul.

Quansah sending off, Mexican player recklessly wipes out Anthony Gordon to get game stopped so VAR can review incident, assault on Gordon not even looked at just ignored
 
I'd say 25 years ago, late 90s early 00's, you'd regularly hear pundit say things like "oh, there is contact, he's got a right to go down" as players hurled themselves to the ground at the slightest contact.

That was nonsense then, but it was widely repeated.

I think the game has actually moved forward from there now. It's generally accepted that any contact has to be meaningful as it is, after all, a contact sport and not all contact is a foul. You'll still find soft penalties, of course, same as always, but on the whole, I think we've moved on from contact=foul.
 
There has been an improvement in allowing the game to flow and stopping a fair amount of cheating however still some errors.

The Mexico penalty was a nonsense as an example.

More contentious the Kane non penalty (correct imo as was going down before any contacr) and the Egyptian disallowed goal (incorrect imo as felt the contact and chucked himself to the floor).

They need to stop the blatant fouling at corners next (hands should be down at your sides unless challenging for the ball).

Oh, and the FA need to ensure they follow the lead and crack down on those things in the PL next season. The Championship isn't too bad (except for the relegated teams) tbf.
 
One of the issues I think is that replays, particularly slowed down, which seems to be primarily what they go off, only give you part of the story, but they seem to be treated as the definitive version of events.

You can't judge speed or force from them. I think you get refs in real time see the incident, think it's not significant enough for a foul but then get sent to a monitor where a slowed down version looks worse.

I do have some sympathy with them. It's a brave man, knowing the world is watching, who says "trust me, I know the replay looks bad but there was nothing in it".
 
What annoys me is that VAR was introduced to correct clear mistakes, but what seems to be happening now is that it is effectively re-refereeing incidents using a different standard from the one being applied by the referee during the game.

Take the challenge on the Argentina player by the Egypt defender before the disallowed goal. The referee had a clear view of the incident, judged it not to be a foul, and was consistent with that decision throughout the match, allowing similar challenges to go unpunished. However, because a goal was scored shortly afterwards, VAR intervened and advised the referee to review it. The referee then overturned his original decision, effectively applying a different threshold for what constitutes a foul.

My issue is not necessarily with the decision itself, but with the inconsistency. If the referee had been calling those types of challenges as fouls all game, then the intervention would have made more sense. Instead, it feels as though incidents leading to goals are being judged by a stricter standard than identical incidents elsewhere on the pitch, which is not what VAR was intended to do.
 
Just watched the Argentina v Egypt highlights hoping to see evidence of the pro-Messi conspiracy. Both key decisions correct. Foul on the Argentina forward, sadly, because it was a superb goal. He gets his foot stood on. No foul on Sala. No story here.

People will all disagree on individual decisions, it's often subjective, even with VAR, but I think the referring and VAR has been as good as can be expected – with the exception of the disallowed Germany goal, which was a joke.
 
johnsmithsno2 said:
Just watched the Argentina v Egypt highlights hoping to see evidence of the pro-Messi conspiracy. Both key decisions correct. Foul on the Argentina forward, sadly, because it was a superb goal. He gets his foot stood on. No foul on Sala. No story here.

People will all disagree on individual decisions, it's often subjective, even with VAR, but I think the referring and VAR has been as good as can be expected – with the exception of the disallowed Germany goal, which was a joke.
Click to expand...
You see.

Even here we disagree.

I think the German disallowed goal was one of the best uses because there is too much intentional obstructing of keepers at corners with no eye on the ball at all.

The laws are quite subjective.
 
johnsmithsno2 said:
Just watched the Argentina v Egypt highlights hoping to see evidence of the pro-Messi conspiracy. Both key decisions correct. Foul on the Argentina forward, sadly, because it was a superb goal. He gets his foot stood on. No foul on Sala. No story here.

People will all disagree on individual decisions, it's often subjective, even with VAR, but I think the referring and VAR has been as good as can be expected – with the exception of the disallowed Germany goal, which was a joke.
Click to expand...
I'd agree the refereeing has been OK in the most part. Some errors, some contentious decisions that could've gone either way, but all about what you'd expect. There is just more of a focus because of it being a World Cup and it feels like there are more errors because we are seeing so many games in such a short period of time.
The only real shocker of a refereeing performance I've seen as a whole, rather than odd moments, was France vs Paraguay where the ref didn't seem to know some basic rules and lost control of the game.
 
MickaelDebevePhenomenal said:
What annoys me is that VAR was introduced to correct clear mistakes, but what seems to be happening now is that it is effectively re-refereeing incidents using a different standard from the one being applied by the referee during the game.

Take the challenge on the Argentina player by the Egypt defender before the disallowed goal. The referee had a clear view of the incident, judged it not to be a foul, and was consistent with that decision throughout the match, allowing similar challenges to go unpunished. However, because a goal was scored shortly afterwards, VAR intervened and advised the referee to review it. The referee then overturned his original decision, effectively applying a different threshold for what constitutes a foul.

My issue is not necessarily with the decision itself, but with the inconsistency. If the referee had been calling those types of challenges as fouls all game, then the intervention would have made more sense. Instead, it feels as though incidents leading to goals are being judged by a stricter standard than identical incidents elsewhere on the pitch, which is not what VAR was intended to do.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what VAR was intended to do. Which is why it should be burned to the ground and then the ground it was on should be burned.

If something happens in the build up to a goal (or prior to an awarded penalty) VAR reviews it and applies the VAR-based threshold.

It doesn't matter what happens in similar incidents where a goal isn't scored because VAR doesn't have permission to intervene (unless it's to draw attention to a potential red card).

The whole concept of VAR is flawed (in my opinion).
 
festa5 said:
One of the issues I think is that replays, particularly slowed down, which seems to be primarily what they go off, only give you part of the story, but they seem to be treated as the definitive version of events.

You can't judge speed or force from them. I think you get refs in real time see the incident, think it's not significant enough for a foul but then get sent to a monitor where a slowed down version looks worse.

I do have some sympathy with them. It's a brave man, knowing the world is watching, who says "trust me, I know the replay looks bad but there was nothing in it".
Click to expand...
Totally agree. Look at the penalty given against Kane. Absolutely nothing in real time. Slow it right down and you get a slow motion of Kane kicking into his foot, with seemingly no attention given to the fact the Mexcian player put his leg across him and made no real attempt to play the ball. In fact if they were stood upright the same scenario would've been given as a free kick to England. All attention becomes focused in on the exact point of contact.
 
The Egypt disallowed goal was correct sadly. A massive shame as it was a great goal too. Salah wasn’t fouled in the box either.

I also think England’s red was correct. It was unlucky as no intent but it was still a nasty one. No issues with the Mexico penalty either. I can see why they gave it. In fact, the circumstances were very similar to the one England received in the European Championship Semi Final.
 
Nero said:
I also think England’s red was correct. It was unlucky as no intent but it was still a nasty one. No issues with the Mexico penalty either. I can see why they gave it. In fact, the circumstances were very similar to the one England received in the European Championship Semi Final.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with that. What is worrying is the ref didn't give either decision in real time. Is that because he interpreted the event differently, or because he was wanting VAR to make the big calls. Either way, its bad refereeing.
 
wilkos_perm said:
Totally agree. Look at the penalty given against Kane. Absolutely nothing in real time. Slow it right down and you get a slow motion of Kane kicking into his foot, with seemingly no attention given to the fact the Mexcian player put his leg across him and made no real attempt to play the ball. In fact if they were stood upright the same scenario would've been given as a free kick to England. All attention becomes focused in on the exact point of contact.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's a good example. Anyone who's played at any level knows that sort of thing happens a lot - both go to kick a loose ball, one might get there a fraction earlier than the other and there's some contact but unless it's excessive force or dangerous no-one thinks anything of it. Never seen anyone claim a pen for it at grass roots level.
 
MickaelDebevePhenomenal said:
I'd agree with that. What is worrying is the ref didn't give either decision in real time. Is that because he interpreted the event differently, or because he was wanting VAR to make the big calls. Either way, its bad refereeing.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, or maybe he just didn’t pick up the details. Humans make mistakes. Our attention can also be diverted at critical times.
 
festa5 said:
Yeah it's a good example. Anyone who's played at any level knows that sort of thing happens a lot - both go to kick a loose ball, one might get there a fraction earlier than the other and there's some contact but unless it's excessive force or dangerous no-one thinks anything of it. Never seen anyone claim a pen for it at grass roots level.
Click to expand...
It is interesting because if you watch it frame by frame the Mexican initially makes contact with his studs on kanes shin.

You could argue it was reckless and the Mexican should be sent off by this still image - which is obviously stupid
...

Stuff like that makes a mockery.

1000051879.jpg
 
MickaelDebevePhenomenal said:
I'd agree with that. What is worrying is the ref didn't give either decision in real time. Is that because he interpreted the event differently, or because he was wanting VAR to make the big calls. Either way, its bad refereeing.
Click to expand...
That's harsh. I was screaming what a great tackle it was until I saw the other angle and realised I was wrong. That's happened a few times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top