EPTHe is good but in some instances still acts like peak Ronaldo but is no longer the guy that can turn things around in a half chance.
Today it showed.
2023 - 2024 Football Thread - Page 138
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
KobraKay
Portugal4235 Posts
He is good but in some instances still acts like peak Ronaldo but is no longer the guy that can turn things around in a half chance. Today it showed. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On July 02 2024 07:14 Acrofales wrote: Maybe it's a Dutch thing, but in the Euro 2000, Netherlands outplayed Italy in every way, except scoring. They got 2 penalties during regular playtime. Seedorf was one of the penalty takers, and he missed. Then in the penalty shootout he missed again. He was far from the only player to miss a penalty in that match, but he was already known as a bad penalty taker beforehand, took 2, and missed both. He was a great player and had an amazing career, but he will always be associated with that one game against Italy in the collective memory of the Dutch... Poor Clarence, did he at least get to do a self-deprecating advert for Pizza Hut years later like Gareth Southgate? | ||
GTR
51515 Posts
![[image loading]](https://i.redd.it/xyqiauhnp0ad1.jpeg) | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18563 Posts
| ||
|
justanothertownie
16321 Posts
| ||
|
gTank
Austria2601 Posts
| ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7030 Posts
On July 02 2024 13:43 GTR wrote: this was given a goal btw VAR says onside so I guess it was onside. Defenders big toe is furthest And no it wasn't the guy on top but the guy in the middle | ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom1382 Posts
| ||
|
gTank
Austria2601 Posts
| ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom1382 Posts
On July 02 2024 17:02 gTank wrote: It looks like he is onside so its ok. If you compare this image to the offside in GER vs DEN its really close tho. Makes you wonder how much "advantage" the danish player had for his goal not to be allowed compared to this one. This whole ruleset should get reworked tbh. I definitely don't agree with how the rule works now that we have centimetre accuracy on every offside decision. The offside rule was designed when linesmen made all of the offside decisions, and the unwritten rule was that they'd give the attacker the benefit of the doubt if it wasn't obvious to them that it was offside. The logic being that if the offside wasn't obvious to the linesman then the attacker couldn't possibly have been gaining enough of an advantage to be penalised. Now that we're using VAR to look at offsides, I'd probably want the rule reworking so that we only look at the players' feet, and so that one of the attacker's feet needs to be fully ahead of both of the defender's feet for them to be considered offside. We would still get marginal calls, but at least they'd be penalising a discernible advantage for the attacker when those marginal calls went against them, an advantage that isn't really there when half of their little toe is enough to be given offside. Of course, my preferred option would be scrapping VAR. The rules were designed around fallible players playing a fluid game officiated by fallible referees and linesmen, and many rules had unwritten benefit of the doubt baked in for this reason. The handball rule is another that suffers greatly once you're able to apply slow-motion scrutiny in the manner that VAR allows, much to everyone's annoyance and disbelief. | ||
|
MyLovelyLurker
France756 Posts
On July 02 2024 17:14 MJG wrote: I definitely don't agree with how the rule works now that we have centimetre accuracy on every offside decision. The offside rule was designed when linesmen made all of the offside decisions, and the unwritten rule was that they'd give the attacker the benefit of the doubt if it wasn't obvious to them that it was offside. The logic being that if the offside wasn't obvious to the linesman then the attacker couldn't possibly have been gaining enough of an advantage to be penalised. Now that we're using VAR to look at offsides, I'd probably want the rule reworking so that we only look at the players' feet, and so that one of the attacker's feet needs to be fully ahead of both of the defender's feet for them to be considered offside. We would still get marginal calls, but at least they'd be penalising a discernible advantage for the attacker when those marginal calls went against them, an advantage that isn't really there when half of their little toe is enough to be given offside. This is a very strong post and point. Now that we have a super accurate computer-generated line estimate, we should give it a bit of natural leeway since no-one can control exactly where their toe lands in the swing of the action. Otherwise, and since everyone is forever looking to be at the edge of offsideness, it turns into what we're currently seeing, which is an excruciatingly dull 3 minute coin flip after each goal. VAR is reintroducing the very randomness it was supposed to fight. Not great for spectators or players. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7030 Posts
Handball rule was meh and stays meh. Maybe just give a freekick for "normal" handballs aka short distance no reaction time handballs and just give pens for intended handballs | ||
|
gTank
Austria2601 Posts
On July 02 2024 18:42 Harris1st wrote: I like the offside rule as is very much. Very clear and factual. Handball rule was meh and stays meh. Maybe just give a freekick for "normal" handballs aka short distance no reaction time handballs and just give pens for intended handballs This is a great idea. Still has some room for interpretation what exactly intended handball should be but its better than what we have right now. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28733 Posts
On July 02 2024 18:42 Harris1st wrote: I like the offside rule as is very much. Very clear and factual. Handball rule was meh and stays meh. Maybe just give a freekick for "normal" handballs aka short distance no reaction time handballs and just give pens for intended handballs This is exactly what I've come to think, too. Give indirect freekicks for some handballs and penalties for the deliberate ones/ones that stop a goal. | ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom1382 Posts
On July 02 2024 20:37 Liquid`Drone wrote: This is exactly what I've come to think, too. Give indirect freekicks for some handballs and penalties for the deliberate ones/ones that stop a goal. If it's a deliberate handball that unequivocally stops a goal (i.e. Suarez that one time) then I think the referee should be allowed to award the goal, much like they do in rugby with penalty tries, but that would be a very controversial change. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18563 Posts
| ||
|
justanothertownie
16321 Posts
On July 02 2024 18:42 Harris1st wrote: I like the offside rule as is very much. Very clear and factual. Handball rule was meh and stays meh. Maybe just give a freekick for "normal" handballs aka short distance no reaction time handballs and just give pens for intended handballs Yeah, offside is as good as it has ever been and will be. I think it is perfectly fine as is. Handballs on the other hand are just very hard to regulate. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7030 Posts
On July 02 2024 20:38 MJG wrote: If it's a deliberate handball that unequivocally stops a goal (i.e. Suarez that one time) then I think the referee should be allowed to award the goal, much like they do in rugby with penalty tries, but that would be a very controversial change. You can easily go through several stages of severity: Accidental handball -> Freekick Deliberate handball in the box -> Pen + Yellow Deliberate handball in front of goal -> Pen + Red Pen + Red is in 95% worse for the defending team than just giving up a goal | ||
|
Oukka
Finland1683 Posts
On July 02 2024 22:34 sharkie wrote: But you cant allow leeway for refs to decide. That has been the problem before VAR. Every ref decides something else. You just cant do that Just about every football rule except for ball being out-of-play has a judgement element and will continue to do so. Agreed with you that this would be bad case of it, but nothing new really. | ||
FlaShFTW
United States10269 Posts
On July 02 2024 13:43 GTR wrote: this was given a goal btw Not entirely sure on the exact frame here but people were saying this is 1 frame too early and that the next frame is the correct one which clearly shows Oliveria offside. Anyways, doesn't matter since the USA couldn't score regardless to advance. The ref in this game was so in over his head. Not sure how a ref who's been investigated for potential matchfixing/getting favors from a team he reffed before is even allowed to still be licensed and ref such an important game. This was maybe the worst reffing I've ever seen so far watching footie. Hopefully Berthalter is out after this. USA also need to develop stronger midfield players. | ||
| ||
