Jump to content

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, torryowl said:

i tend to agree with the  new rule ... i once saw andy ritchie score a goal for leeds against us that wouldnt have gone in if it hadnt accidentally hit his hand ....i felt we'd been robbed .....i fail to see that because he didnt mean to handle it then it should have stood 


One of the issues with the new rule is that the defending team doesn’t have to clear the ball. If an attacking player is down on the ground, for example, the defender can just play the ball against the attacker’s arm and it means the attack comes to an end.

 

And it’s not just at the moment the goal is scored: it takes effect anywhere in the same passage of play, as happened the other week when Spurs had their equaliser against the pigs disallowed. Spurs player went to ground earlier in the attack and the ball was adjudged to have inadvertently brushed against his arm. VAR saw it and the goal was disallowed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

How did you get to minus 57,  perhaps you posted a thread that nobody agreed with ?


I have a feeling some agree 🤷‍♂️

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, torryowl said:

i tend to agree with the  new rule ... i once saw andy ritchie score a goal for leeds against us that wouldnt have gone in if it hadnt accidentally hit his hand ....i felt we'd been robbed .....i fail to see that because he didnt mean to handle it then it should have stood 


Andy Ritchie put the ball in with his hand, so it should’ve been disallowed. The new rule takes action on any contact between ball and hand/arm, even if it has no significance in the play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, the third man said:

the rule that says you can obstruct a player trying the get to the ball while it runs out for a goal kick

 

If I could change 1 rule it would be that it’s fair game and not a free kick to go down the back of any players Achilles who is doing that 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, punkskaphil said:


Andy Ritchie put the ball in with his hand, so it should’ve been disallowed. The new rule takes action on any contact between ball and hand/arm, even if it has no significance in the play.

i dont know the rule but if someone handles it and his team go on to score a goal i'd be aggrieved that it was allowed  it was against us .......how can it be insignificant if the team score ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, torryowl said:

ive watched football for a lot of years and cant recall any team from the kick off booting to the other team ......

Apart from in 90% of kick offs.

 

Unless you are Matt Le Tissier....then you make sure it doesn’t go to anyone 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, madowl47 said:

And it’s rules like this that creates empty seats. 
 

We can but hope yours is one of them

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, madowl47 said:

  Plays into the hands of teams with the most money who can pass from one end to the other. 

 

Cus that happens all the time doesn’t it 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, the third man said:

about the same time that foul throws were done away with, and the rule that says you can obstruct a player trying the get to the ball while it runs out for a goal kick

 

 

Unless the wording has changed in the last 30 years, it was only obstruction if you were preventing a player reaching the ball AND the ball was 'not within your own playing distance'. i.e. you couldn't reach the ball yourself if you wanted to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ian said:

Apart from in 90% of kick offs.

 

Unless you are Matt Le Tissier....then you make sure it doesn’t go to anyone 

no never saw that ....the centre forward knocked it to the inside right or left who passed  it where ever he pleased .......never have i seen someone launch  it forward straight from the kick off 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, heppers said:


Footballers that can pass? That needs stopping. 

 

We`re not having any of that caper at Hillsbro . 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, madowl47 said:


So they have reacted to maybe on the odd occasion a team wasting time at the end of a match by ruining the rest of the game with this crazy rule .... Joke of a rule .. made by the new connoisseurs of perfect football. 

I’m going to buck the trend and agree with you on this one.  It’s a rule that could have been written by Pep, but at least it’s not been compounded by Wednesday trying to take advantage of it - can you imagine!  As an alternative means of stopping time wasting, could have given an indirect free kick at the point the defender touched the goal kick in the penalty area.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Steve Down South said:

I’m going to buck the trend and agree with you on this one.  It’s a rule that could have been written by Pep, but at least it’s not been compounded by Wednesday trying to take advantage of it - can you imagine!  As an alternative means of stopping time wasting, could have given an indirect free kick at the point the defender touched the goal kick in the penalty area.


completely correct.  Plays right into the hands of teams already taking others apart.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, torryowl said:

i'd like to know why they thought passing the ball backwards from the kick off would make for a more exciting game   ........while we are on rules ,when was the 6 second rule that the keeper could keep posession done away with ?.......

Still there as far as I know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, punkskaphil said:


One of the issues with the new rule is that the defending team doesn’t have to clear the ball. If an attacking player is down on the ground, for example, the defender can just play the ball against the attacker’s arm and it means the attack comes to an end.

 

And it’s not just at the moment the goal is scored: it takes effect anywhere in the same passage of play, as happened the other week when Spurs had their equaliser against the pigs disallowed. Spurs player went to ground earlier in the attack and the ball was adjudged to have inadvertently brushed against his arm. VAR saw it and the goal was disallowed.

There is a cut off point. I think it is before the final pass for the goal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TomtheOwl95 said:

Still there as far as I know.

It is but just extremely poorly policed. Ref will just probably wave at the keeper to hurry up rather than straight out penalise him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...