Couldn't think....part 4

OutcastLondoner

With the Bellingham one, it's ridiculous that the referee blew just before he put it into an open goal, stopping a VAR check. If he'd been allowed to score, there's no way a VAR check could reasonably give that to Ederson.

OldCastleSwift

OutcastLondoner said:

With the Bellingham one, it's ridiculous that the referee blew just before he put it into an open goal, stopping a VAR check. If he'd been allowed to score, there's no way a VAR check could reasonably give that to Ederson.

Yeah, the ref dropped the ball on that one, but maybe without Ederson's reaction he lets it go and then, if necessary, VAR steps in.

OldCastleSwift

MrsGrey said:

It's a NO for me.

I don't want games re-refereed after the event. I think what we have is ok. I think the review of straight reds (given and missed) is as far as any post-match changes should be allowed to go.

I would like to see more punishment of simulation, and can't understand why var didn't get the ref to look at the monitor to check what happened and consider a yellow card. Use the system we've got properly.

I just think that if a player is retrospectively booked for blatant (and I know how that's subjective) simulation, then someone like Salah or Grealish who do it a lot would end up with a suspension, which presumably would discourage it to some extent. Maybe the FA/PL can make it that if a player gets two yellows for simulation they get an automatic three match ban.

I don't know, but something needs to change in my eyes. There's no consequence as it stands so it'll become accepted as part of the game (if it already hasn't). In time, players will work more on 'winning fouls' than they will on actually playing the game; young players starting out will be coached in how to 'win' penalties and how to scream the loudest.

baracks_a_hammer

Of course retro action won’t change the outcome of the game. But at least it punishes the offender in some way. That’s got to be a good thing and IMO would act as some sort of a deterrent.

That said why can’t it be clamped down on HARD right at the time. I mean whomever in the VAR booth saw the rhodri incident and thought no punishment was necessary must be in dire need of a trip to spec savers.

OutcastLondoner

Can’t they already give suspensions for diving? Didn’t Lanzini get one?

Salah and Grealish often get some contact. The bigger problem than blatant diving is players initiating contact then going down

baracks_a_hammer

If you fall down clutching a part of the body that wasn’t touched, it should be a red card offence for the VAR ref.

ScotHammer

MrsGrey said:

It's a NO for me.

I don't want games re-refereed after the event. I think what we have is ok. I think the review of straight reds (given and missed) is as far as any post-match changes should be allowed to go.

I would like to see more punishment of simulation, and can't understand why var didn't get the ref to look at the monitor to check what happened and consider a yellow card. Use the system we've got properly.


With reference to your example, baracks - if a (missed) dive wins a penalty. Penalty is scored. What do you do on review after the game, give a yellow? But you can't undo the penalty. Or, do you change the score ... you can't because the fact a goal was scored changed how the game played out (manager might have changed formation, or made substitutions...) No. No. No. You can't tur back the clock.


Did I say I'm not in favour? ;-)

I agree we can’t referee retrospectively, but in my opinion the officials need to stamp ALL simulation. The current trend seems to be that even when fouled the player throws them-self down, and doesn’t know which part of his body to hold in the throws of death. They seem to be trained to WIN fouls, which is not the way the game should be played. We all know certain players who attract “sniper rifles” more than others, but a lot of players do it!

Rant over! 😡

buffybegood

Mrs G is right in that they have to start applying the rule that exist. We've got to move away from the "There's contact, he's entitled to go down (if he plays for a big club)" attitude. and, unless players are punished for going down when there's no reason for them to, even if there is the slightest bit of contact, then they're going to keep doing it.

A perfect example was Rashford about a month ago. He switched direction, and his weight was on his right foot. His left leg was in the air, and he was about to put his weight on it. There was the slightest bit of contact on his right foot. His weight was heading back to his left, then, almost in slow motion, you could see his brain ticking. Contact, must go down. So he literally lifts both feet up off the ground, bending them at the knees, and falls over. It was dreadful, and it's so obvious what he's done, but, as he's a Man Utd player, he gets rewarded with a penalty.

There is no way whatsoever that he goes over anywhere else on the pitch, and certainly not as theatrically as he did. The contact didn't affect his left foot, the one he was about to put his weight on, yet that crumpled up underneath him anyway.

The rules need to change; if there's clearly no attempt to stay on your feet, then you get nothing other than a yellow card, regardless of any contact.

ScotHammer

I think the ex-pro pundits are partly to blame. They are always saying things like “there was a contact, so he’s entitled to go down” or “ he was clever there to win that foul/penalty”. If this is what ex-players and managers are saying, what are they coaching people?

baracks_a_hammer

It’s cheating basically. These same pundits probably would have been up in arms at maradona in 1986. There is no difference though - it is still cheating to gain an advantage.

MrsGrey

ScotHammer said:

I “ he was clever there to win that foul/penalty”.

Doesn't mean it wasn't a foul/penalty though. Where the player puts himself between the man and the ball and knows he's going to get fouled (unless the other player doesn't compete/pulls out of he tackle), then yes he's 'won it by clever/skilful play'. Nothing wrong with that. The other player should have got there first or tackled more skilfully.

BubblesNeverDies

Incidents in the penalty area are generally subject to more scrutiny by VAR which ought to be able to determine whether it is simulation or not.
Incidents outside the penalty area that are later judged to be simulation could be given retrospective yellow cards. Any goals that result from said simulation would of course have to stand but at least the offending team/player receives some punishment.

ScotHammer

MrsGrey said:

ScotHammer said:

I “ he was clever there to win that foul/penalty”.

Doesn't mean it wasn't a foul/penalty though. Where the player puts himself between the man and the ball and knows he's going to get fouled (unless the other player doesn't compete/pulls out of he tackle), then yes he's 'won it by clever/skilful play'. Nothing wrong with that. The other player should have got there first or tackled more skilfully.

I agree that it is often a foul/penalty. Perhaps I just don’t like the idea of WINNING a foul or penalty - I’d like players to use their undoubted skills to score/create goals, defend, etc rather than acting! I give you Grealish, Salah, etc. Sometimes you are embarrassed for them.

BubblesNeverDies

And then there's the "Vardy".
He's running with the ball with a defender alongside trying to keep up when he changes course so that the defender hasn't time to react to avoid clattering into him. He does it all the time.

Fortuneseeker

Can I please Harry Kane to the charge sheet especially the one v Brighton where he looks for the player trying to jump to head the ball & in doing so they go over the top of him so he goes to ground.

alderz

The problem with all of these examples is that they aren’t dives or simulation under the laws of the game, so re-reffing and providing retrospective punishment would have no affect on these incidents. I agree that they are all frustrating and I would rather they were considered simulation, but when you have situations where Phil Foden stays on his feet and gets nothing, then the rest of it is never going to change.

ASLEFshrugged

A bit of nostalgia



Ref in black, keepers in green
Everyone wearing black boots
Backpass to the keeper
Bog rolls from the terraces

Charlie Nicholas, he's a...♫

And John Lyall smoking in the dugout

Dodger58

Thanks for posting that ASLEF a cracking watch, great flowing football from both sides with very few histrionics. Funny to see Bonds wearing the No.10 shirt. Poor edit when showing John Lyle with his cigarette as the advertising hoarding was cut to "WIMP" Also some heavy challenges which would have seen red nowadays, but players just getting on with it, no diving or trying to get your opponent carded ... those were the days.

whupathman

I wonder what happened to David Icke lol

whupathman

btw I was in the north bank that day

baracks_a_hammer

So a question:

If Man Utd win the Europa and finish 2nd in the Prem, and Chelsea win the CL and finish 4th, does that potentially open up 5th/6th as CL spots??..

Lukerz

Maximum of 5. It Chelsea win CL & Arsenal win EL, that would basically mean you’d need top 3 to qualify via league (assuming neither of them finish top 3).

yoyo

PLEASE God don't let Arsenal win the Europa league, that would be unbearable

Jorderz_Moyes_will_be_Moyes

Our friends in Prague will deal with Arsenal, don't worry.

yoyo

Today Grand National, No26 Discorama owned by two Hammers fans.Tom Friel , the Landlord of the Black lion in Plaistow and Andrew Gemmell

Slacker

ASLEFshrugged said:

A bit of nostalgia



Ref in black, keepers in green
Everyone wearing black boots
Backpass to the keeper
Bog rolls from the terraces

Charlie Nicholas, he's a...♫

And John Lyall smoking in the dugout

Oh I really enjoyed that. What a fantastic old football ground we had.

yoyo

Anyone you think we should be looking to off load this summer? Anderson presumably

ScotHammer

yoyo said:

Anyone you think we should be looking to off load this summer? Anderson presumably

Off-load the plane when we get into Europe 👍😀

OldCastleSwift

yoyo said:

Anyone you think we should be looking to off load this summer? Anderson presumably

Anderson, Lanzini and Yarmolenko for me. They haven't contributed much (or anything in Anderson's case) to the success this season, so none would be missed from the squad, IMO. Big wages saved, but I don't think we'll make a great deal of money from them; if we can squeeze £35m for the three we'll have done well.

Martin's out of contract so I expect he'll be released from the playing squad, although he might hang around in a coaching capacity as he seems to be a popular character around the place. I expect Balbuena will probably go as realistically he's 4th choice CB at best now, but he's out of contract too so again, no boost to the transfer kitty.

Obviously expect a few of the U23s to be moved on, but none of them are really threatening the first team squad right now.

Hopefully if we can shift Anderson, Yarmo and Lanzini, Moyes will have a bit more to play with. In theory he should have the £30m he allegedly had available to him in January, plus £30m which is what I believe our standard summer budget to be, and then potentially another £30m with expendable player sales. Maybe if the Dave's can find another £10m down the back of their collective sofas then Moyes could have £100m to spend.

IronHerb

The new Forbes Football Club valuation has been released placing West Ham in 18th position valued at $508m.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2021/04/12/the-worlds-most-valuable-soccer-teams-barcelona-on-top-at-48-billion/?sh=32bc85e016ac