BFTG - Norwich home

[WAZZOCK]

What a strange argument this is all round.

I was aware that a large number of (mostly insignificant) changes had been made to the laws of the game over the summer, however the new offside rule had passed me by.

Perhaps this was because the vast majority of media outlets decided to report on the top line changes rather than waste time regaling is with the nitty gritty of all 96 changes?!

The high profile changes were the amendments to kick offs and red/yellow cards for denial of a goal scoring opportunity etc - which were widely reported on.

Regardless, the dick measuring in here is a bit pathetic really.

[Sutekh]

But why fiddle with the offside law all the time. It's one plainly simple rule that FIFA has continually piddled about with for the last 10/15 years for no real reason whatsoever and all it has achieved is utter confusion amongst players, fans and officials.

[tmesis]

Indeed, and it was wrong with that he did.
I agree that too often the powers that be tinker with the laws for very little benefit. They rarely address the significant problems in the game. The offside law is a perfect example where probably only a tiny number of fans really know the law. the new change will, I think, be hard to officiate. At grass roots level it will be almost impossible.

Just maybe, the problem with lots of people not understanding the (actually rather simple rule - new or old) is people making no effort to learn it or keep up to date with changes and taking all their knowledge from TV pundits who have also made no effort to learn the laws and any changes. .

They have to be aware changes have been made.

Or are you saying you actively go online every year to see if there any rule changes you don't know about?

On this issue, you might even have known the rule had changed, but not been aware of the detail that this could now mean a free kick being awarded in the player's own half now.


For pundits knowing the rules should be a minimum requirement, but instead most seem to struggle with the idea that referees have to go by the rules as written by FIFA, not what Andy Townsend (or whoever) thinks the rules ought to be.

That said, the confusion v Norwich had nothing to do with pundits.

[tmesis]

But why fiddle with the offside law all the time. It's one plainly simple rule that FIFA has continually piddled about with for the last 10/15 years for no real reason whatsoever and all it has achieved is utter confusion amongst players, fans and officials.

They started fiddling with it because goals were constantly being disallowed for players being offside, despite that player having no part in the goal - what we'd call passive offside now.

From there there's been a bit of a struggle to define passive and active, and the actual moment the offence of offside occurs.

[muirinho]

But why fiddle with the offside law all the time. It's one plainly simple rule that FIFA has continually piddled about with for the last 10/15 years for no real reason whatsoever and all it has achieved is utter confusion amongst players, fans and officials.

They started fiddling with it because goals were constantly being disallowed for players being offside, despite that player having no part in the goal - what we'd call passive offside now.

From there there's been a bit of a struggle to define passive and active, and the actual moment the offence of offside occurs.

I can see the point of the passive vs active, although it's still very subjective - at least the previous rule was cut and dried.

But I can't see any benefit to the latest changes other than confusion.

[Woodcote Royal]

Platy I would expect better of you.
If thousands of people, most of whom are active followers of the game, some of whom are paid participants, didn't understand what was going on then something went wrong with communication.
My suggestion, that Ian seems to think is so outrageous, of putting the info in front of people at the game seems reasonable.
Apologies if you disagree, but your collection of websites doesn't address the fact that clearly the communication failed.

A big + 1

Even if Auntie was filling half it's massive, business destroying website with every rule change FIFA has ever made the FA, as the UK's governing body, should be putting this out across all the club's official sites at the start of every season and they, in turn, should be forwarding it on to all STHs at the very least.

I believe a referee or representative visits all clubs pre-season and that should be the time to ensure all players, managers and coaches are abreast of any changes.

As someone who spends a lot time driving in central London, like countless others I have been driven to distraction for years by so little information regarding the myriad of things that can bring this heavily congested area to a stand still.

While much frustration still exists, the advent in recent years of TFL's heads up Thursday E-Mail listing planned weekend demos (and boy! Does the MET love policing demos ) Tower Bridge now open again and extra security at changing of the guard ect etc etc etc has made a significant contribution to keeping those using London's transport system informed and, therefore, allowing, them to make informed decisions about how and when to make their way across the capital.

I believe anyone can sign up for this weekly E-Mail and, trust me, if TFL can do it, anyone can.

[CountryRoyal]

Jesus Christ who fukking cares.

[sandman]

Indeed, and it was wrong with that he did.
I agree that too often the powers that be tinker with the laws for very little benefit. They rarely address the significant problems in the game. The offside law is a perfect example where probably only a tiny number of fans really know the law. the new change will, I think, be hard to officiate. At grass roots level it will be almost impossible.

Just maybe, the problem with lots of people not understanding the (actually rather simple rule - new or old) is people making no effort to learn it or keep up to date with changes and taking all their knowledge from TV pundits who have also made no effort to learn the laws and any changes. .

They have to be aware changes have been made.

Or are you saying you actively go online every year to see if there any rule changes you don't know about?

On this issue, you might even have known the rule had changed, but not been aware of the detail that this could now mean a free kick being awarded in the player's own half now.


For pundits knowing the rules should be a minimum requirement, but instead most seem to struggle with the idea that referees have to go by the rules as written by FIFA, not what Andy Townsend (or whoever) thinks the rules ought to be.

That said, the confusion v Norwich had nothing to do with pundits.

He probably does, he is a boring c[u]nt.

[St. Brynjar]

The state of this argument, Jesus wept. A rule changed, most of us couldn't be arsed to keep up to date and so booed the ref for making a correct decision. It was utterly insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

[SCIAG]

As insignificant as it is.....

the ref took a verbal pummelling unnecessarily

Seems like another pointless FA rule change....which confuses the f11ck out of us.......the thick gate-payers

Are you really suggesting it was the FA that changed the law ? The laws are determined by FIFA !

Are you sure about that?

The laws are determined by IFAB, which is 50% FIFA, and 50% the British FAs.

Agree that it's a sensible change for the sake of consistency, but one which complicates things for assistant referees and hasn't been properly communicated. A video aired in grounds and on the TV would have been very useful given the unprecedented number of rule changes this year.

[Woodcote Royal]

The state of this argument, Jesus wept. A rule changed, most of us couldn't be arsed to keep up to date and so booed the ref for making a correct decision. It was utterly insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

Don't rush back from Cambridge you might be missed.

[Nameless]

The state of this argument, Jesus wept. A rule changed, most of us couldn't be arsed to keep up to date and so booed the ref for making a correct decision. It was utterly insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

In the grand scheme of things football, sport and even RFC are pretty insignificant. However us amoeba need something to pass the time of our humdrum existence.

It is amusing to see the numbers of people joining the thread to tell us they aren't interested. Almost feels like NSC at times....

[Nameless]

And I thought better of apparent thinking followers of the game that they can't grasp the fact that these changes were widely reported ahead of this season, on a wide variety of news outlets over a significant period of time.

Even if each club had broadcast a short video ahead of the first game of the season, you'd still get people like you complaining it wasn't enough and that what you really expected was a personal home visit from David Elleray.

Although of course as you prove the change either wasn't reported, or was misreported !
And to be fair I've not 'complained', it's f@cking obvious to anyone except 'people like you' that huge numbers of people didn't know what was going on. If you are happy with that then OK, but I just feel people would enjoy the game more if we all knew the basis on which it was being played. And we didn't. But we do now so next time it happens we can all nod knowingly and feel pleased.
And if David Ellery knocks on my door I'll set the dog on him. I hate referees.

[Pepe the Horseman]

If the ref had played advantage after the handball, and the goal had been given, would Howson still have been sent off? Has this ever actually happened?

[Stranded]

If the ref had played advantage after the handball, and the goal had been given, would Howson still have been sent off? Has this ever actually happened?

I think technically he could have been, advantage being played doesn't discount the offence, for example refs come back to book players for fouls all the time without giving the free-kick.

In practice, I'm not sure it has or would happen. If it did to a Reading player than the it would be a 20 pager in a no time.

[tidus_mi2]

If the ref had played advantage after the handball, and the goal had been given, would Howson still have been sent off? Has this ever actually happened?

I don't know if it has ever happened but from how I perceive it, he would have still prevented a goal scoring opportunity, we would have just scored from a later one.

[Nameless]

Not quite the same but last season I think it was in a Wales game the ref played an advantage after a bad foul, then shortly afterwards the same player committed another bad foul. The ref pointed to the first foul and showed the yellow, then pointed to the second and showed a second yellow and then a red. Brilliant refereeing !

[CountryRoyal]

It is amusing to see the numbers of people joining the thread to tell us they aren't interested. Almost feels like NSC at times....

Is it?

Because it's not amusing checking this thread in the hope of seeing a more rounded discussion of the whole game but instead all we get is the monotonous dross of grown men arguing about a stupid rule change.

[Nameless]

It is amusing to see the numbers of people joining the thread to tell us they aren't interested. Almost feels like NSC at times....

Is it?

Because it's not amusing checking this thread in the hope of seeing a more rounded discussion of the whole game but instead all we get is the monotonous dross of grown men arguing about a stupid rule change.

There is plenty of discussion of the game and then a fairly small debate about a reasonably ' significant' incident that arose during it.
What are your rules for what is allowed and what is not and are you sure you never post monotonous dross ?

[Jack Celliers]

If the ref had played advantage after the handball, and the goal had been given, would Howson still have been sent off? Has this ever actually happened?

I think technically he could have been, advantage being played doesn't discount the offence, for example refs come back to book players for fouls all the time without giving the free-kick.

In practice, I'm not sure it has or would happen. If it did to a Reading player than the it would be a 20 pager in a no time.

There are two important things here. Firstly, the red-card offence is denying a goal-scoring opportunity, so if a goal is scored, the red-card offence just disappears. He could then book the player for handball, I suppose, and a second yellow could lead to a red. This makes the red card and a goal scenario unlikely. Secondly, refs tend not to play advantage when a red card offence has been committed; they'll see which way the ball is bouncing or allow a shot, but they usually blow the whistle pretty quickly.