Things In Football That Grind Your Gears

jacool

People on the women's World Cup thread trying to compare men's and women's football, and coming up with all these "great ideas" to "improve" the latter.
Why not just enjoy both, for what they are?

hots

jacool wrote: »

People on the women's World Cup thread trying to compare men's and women's football, and coming up with all these "great ideas" to "improve" the latter.
Why not just enjoy both, for what they are?

Because one is significantly lower quality than the other. There are many potential improvements that would make it more competitive and better to watch (anything that makes it better to watch will bring money and quality to the sport).

weldoninhio

Royal Rotten Specs wrote: »

People using only a player's first name on a forum/twitter

Awful cringey

Worse is when they use a nickname, like Raz for Sterling.

caviardreams

hots wrote: »

Because one is significantly lower quality than the other. There are many potential improvements that would make it more competitive and better to watch (anything that makes it better to watch will bring money and quality to the sport).

Perhaps, but there is an element of "men telling women what to do to make it more appealing to men" about some comments too imo. Let's shorten the game to 80 minutes etc., sure who cares what the women who actually play the game think/want :rolleyes:

Discussion and debate is always good and in many cases they are points worth discussing in an open way but there is a serious undercurrent of misogyny coming from one or two posts on that thread.

Guy:Incognito

caviardreams wrote: »

sure who cares what the women who actually play the game think/want :rolleyes:

The Chelsea coach has been quoted for the most part in the discussions. I'm sure she knows what a few of the women who actually play the game think.

As for misogyny? FFS , every time men talk about women isnt misogyny just because they arent saying how great everything is. Every discussion about it dismisses what men are saying as just them being misogynistic .

The truth of the matter is, if women gave a **** about womens football at the rate that men follow mens football, it could be just as big, but they clearly dont care.

Guy:Incognito

The thing that annoys me most is one that comes up fairly often and its where suddenly rules dont apply when you are trying to let a ball run out.

You shouldn't be deemed to be in control of a ball until you touch it.

caviardreams

caviardreams wrote: »

Perhaps, but there is an element of "men telling women what to do to make it more appealing to men" about some comments too imo. Let's shorten the game to 80 minutes etc., sure who cares what the women who actually play the game think/want :rolleyes:

Discussion and debate is always good and in many cases they are points worth discussing in an open way but there is a serious undercurrent of misogyny coming from one or two posts on that thread.

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

The Chelsea coach has been quoted for the most part in the discussions. I'm sure she knows what a few of the women who actually play the game think.

As for misogyny? FFS , every time men talk about women isnt misogyny just because they arent saying how great everything is. Every discussion about it dismisses what men are saying as just them being misogynistic .

The truth of the matter is, if women gave a **** about womens football at the rate that men follow mens football, it could be just as big, but they clearly dont care.

I don't want to drag this off topic, but where did I say all of the posts were misogynistic, or that criticism/discussion of various issues was not valid or worth engaging in?

If you don't see that there are a couple of posts in that thread that pretty much encapsulate the sentiment of "women are useless, I don't know why we should have to watch this ****" than I don't think we are reading the same thread.

hots

caviardreams wrote: »

Perhaps, but there is an element of "men telling women what to do to make it more appealing to men" about some comments too imo. Let's shorten the game to 80 minutes etc., sure who cares what the women who actually play the game think/want :rolleyes:

Discussion and debate is always good and in many cases they are points worth discussing in an open way but there is a serious undercurrent of misogyny coming from one or two posts on that thread.

Or people telling people what to do to make it more appealing to more people (as well as more competitive)? In other sports where there are adjustments for the women's version it seems to work well. I don't think it would for football as it happens because there is a siginificant increase in cost associated with it (pitches smaller or goals smaller), unlike golf, cricket, basketball, tennis, volleyball, hockey etc. where the change is very easy to make at low cost.

MrKingsley

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

The thing that annoys me most is one that comes up fairly often and its where suddenly rules dont apply when you are trying to let a ball run out.

You shouldn't be deemed to be in control of a ball until you touch it.

That really grinds my gears.

How can anyone possibly have control of a ball that they have not touched? Only then should they be deemed to be in possession

dundalkfc10

People getting excited because the fixtures are getting announced. What does it matter, you play everyone twice (EPL) same as every other season

NIMAN

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

People getting excited because the fixtures are getting announced. What does it matter, you play everyone twice (EPL) same as every other season

It gave the sports reporters something to get excited about for a day. Bless them.

Then they were back to telling us things few care about just to justify their job.

Like some team winning the NBA.....who cares!

monkey9

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

The thing that annoys me most is one that comes up fairly often and its where suddenly rules dont apply when you are trying to let a ball run out.

You shouldn't be deemed to be in control of a ball until you touch it.

Even though this does annoy me for some reason, the rules aren't any different. You're perfectly entitled to do that anywhere on the pitch for example a striker holding off a defender as he waits to play in his strike partner.

fullstop

monkey9 wrote: »

Even though this does annoy me for some reason, the rules aren't any different. You're perfectly entitled to do that anywhere on the pitch for example a striker holding off a defender as he waits to play in his strike partner.

You are if you've touched the ball and have it under control. Step across someone and obstruct them without touching the ball the way defenders do when letting the ball run out of play, anywhere else on the pitch and it's a free.

The Mig

This

https://twitter.com/reddevilbible/status/1139881620629012484?s=21

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

commentator is not actually at the match on the Argentina Columbia match on Eir.

And it's painfully obvious.

NIMAN

Yeah, and times like this I'd love the feed to go down for a couple of minutes to watch him squirm.

SureYWouldntYa

Is it possible to have a season in the PL now where all 20 teams can be satisfied with how things went and nobody comes out of the season in crisis or looking for a new manager

Chancer3001

is it possible to have 20 people in a room who are satisfied?

Never mind 20 clubs!

AidoEirE

Ed woodward

Tipsy McSwagger

Stadiums that pump music when the home team scores. Was watching footage from a few years ago and they were playing the Amarillo song, awful.

Tippex

now that Var is in I no longer see the point where referees are not Mic'd like in Rugby. Refs can get away with murder and never have to explain their actions I think both should come in to play (certainly mic'ing the ref should help with the baiting of ref's that goes on in games) and post match explanation of decisions (if they admit on a second viewing that they got it wrong I think fans and teams would be more forgiving)

is_that_so

Offside flag delays - getting longer and longer!

Blinky Plebum

Jesse Lingard.

Average player, seems like a complete and utter twit,looks like the bully from Doug (the cartoon) and somehow has a clothing line (imagine being the poor individual who gets some of that stuff as a Christmas present).

If he came through the youth team at a small club he's be playing at that level he's just one of these people who's lucky enough to get his foot in the door at a big club and has hung on there because that.

monkey9

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Stadiums that pump music when the home team scores. Was watching footage from a few years ago and they were playing the Amarillo song, awful.

I can't stand that, it's pure small time.

inforfun

It is getting a bit more silly now, those tunes, when you might have to wait 5 minutes before a goal actually stands after a var consult.

Never bothered me too much these tunes but after the endless stream of "seven nation army" during fifa and uefa tournaments it does grind my gears now indeed.

They have been doing it for 20+ years now at Feyenoord with a local band's version of "i will survive" but i think it is time to put that one to bed.

osarusan

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Stadiums that pump music when the home team scores. Was watching footage from a few years ago and they were playing the Amarillo song, awful.

On a somewhat related note, the guy who used to do the announcements at Limerick FC games decided to do that thing where the announcer calls out the first name and the crowd reply by calling out the second name. Sounds great when you see it in Germany.


Only problem was he completely neglected to tell anybody he was planning it , so the crowd expected him to say the full name as usual, and there was just a very awkward silence where the second name should have been.

Shanotheslayer

Tippex wrote: »

now that Var is in I no longer see the point where referees are not Mic'd like in Rugby. Refs can get away with murder and never have to explain their actions I think both should come in to play (certainly mic'ing the ref should help with the baiting of ref's that goes on in games) and post match explanation of decisions (if they admit on a second viewing that they got it wrong I think fans and teams would be more forgiving)

Wasn't this trialed before but the language was bad from footballers so it wasn't allowed?

They trialed it against recently in Aussie League and it was very good though from the clip I saw.

adaminho

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Wasn't this trialed before but the language was bad from footballers so it wasn't allowed?

They trialed it against recently in Aussie League and it was very good though from the clip I saw.

Didn't the the ref mike pick up Peter O'Mahony calling a French player "A F**king Muppet" and C.J. Stander calling someone a Gowl in the Rugby?

citytillidie

Tippex wrote: »

now that Var is in I no longer see the point where referees are not Mic'd like in Rugby. Refs can get away with murder and never have to explain their actions I think both should come in to play (certainly mic'ing the ref should help with the baiting of ref's that goes on in games) and post match explanation of decisions (if they admit on a second viewing that they got it wrong I think fans and teams would be more forgiving)

Refs are mic'd just not for tv, UEFA recently release a video of the Champions League final and you can hear the ref talking and explaining decisions too.

inforfun

Last season the Dutch FA released a "VAR of the week" after each round where you had the sound from off and on the pitch from all involved.

Too bad they picked a clear cut one all the time and not some of the dodgy ones.
Never going to happen the refs will have an open mic for 90 minutes.

Blinky Plebum

I really hate David Beckham, possibly the most insincere human being who's ever lived.

Salvation Tambourine

Blinky Plebum wrote: »

I really hate David Beckham, possibly the most insincere human being who's ever lived.

That seems incredibly harsh.

Fr Tod Umptious

Nokotan wrote: »

That seems incredibly harsh.

It certainly does

Does the poster in question wish to articulate his/her hatred for someone they never meet any further ?

Blinky Plebum

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

It certainly does

Does the poster in question wish to articulate his/her hatred for someone they never meet any further ?

This thread is called things in football that grind your gears. It's not suppsoed to be a thread containing expressions of love for things associated with the sport.

I've never liked him and all the nonsense around him, good player back in his day but there's something offputting about him.

I have no opinion on him. He seems very thick and struggles to form sentences, but that's no crime in football.

I'm not a fan of all that he represents, someone getting selling a brand on a veneer of good looks and tattoos, because no one stands up and asks anything like a hard question...like did you really have an affair with a woman who subsequently masturbated a pig on tv. I wouldn't judge him for that, again no crime, consenting adults and their business. But when he sells an image as the perfect family man, one is entitled to ask if that is valid.

Ragnar Lothbrok

Blinky Plebum wrote: »

This thread is called things in football that grind your gears. It's not suppsoed to be a thread containing expressions of love for things associated with the sport.

I've never liked him and all the nonsense around him, good player back in his day but there's something offputting about him.

He seems to be a decent enough bloke. At times he almost looks like a schoolboy who has just been thrust into the limelight.

In fact I almost feel sorry for him because I imagine his wife to be a right shrew, even if she does take it up the ....

callaway92

Not many people come across as-well-as David Beckham (for someone in such a high profile). Can't really see where to pick a negative.

Saying someone SEEMS too nice or insincere is poor form

callaway92

callaway92 wrote: »

Not many people come across as-well-as David Beckham (for someone in such a high profile).

If by well you mean nice, perhaps. I don't know him personally, and his affair with his kids nanny is no biggie...if I was to judge fellows by that criterion alone I'd lose a few of my own friends.

But if by well you mean witty, articulate, intelligent, interesting...I think few come across worse than him.

Blinky Plebum

callaway92 wrote: »

Not many people come across as-well-as David Beckham (for someone in such a high profile). Can't really see where to pick a negative.

Saying someone SEEMS too nice or insincere is poor form

Lots of people in the public eye have seemed very nice and it's turned out not to be the case and loads of people come across as dickheads infront of the media and turn out to be dead sound in reality.

His rant to his PR team about Katherine Jenkins getting an award from the Queen and him not getting a similar award was very enlightening in my eyes.

BTW I was only expressing an opinion, no need to take it so seriously, I've just always got a stench of falesness about him, he's been a corporate shill for all of his adult life and his brand beckham stuff means he can't acually dispaly any real personality and has to be as bland as can be for his brand.

Salvation Tambourine

Football365's holier than thou attitude that has gone into overdrive during the Women's World Cup. Very preachy. Their Mediawatch section has become a farce, it used be fun but now they jump on anything that can be considered offence to anyone.

Then one of their writer throws a line like this into this column https://www.football365.com/news/the-womens-world-cup-delivers-football-without-the-nonsense

'The dissenting chant is familiar now. “Who cares?” shout a lot of men on Twitter who only see their children every other weekend'

The comments below the column are pretty much all very reasonable. The author says he doesn't read them, he probably should.

diusmr8a504cvk

David Meyler, a total manchild.
One thing to be a FIFA YouTuber but his personal Twitter that he aims at children is just embarrassing for someone who calls himself a professional footballer. Putting up polls and tweets fawning over footballers as well just reeks of amateur.

https://twitter.com/DavidMeyler/status/1146241637846306817?s=19

https://twitter.com/DavidMeyler/status/1146181737233432579?s=19

Kirby

I thought we had matured enough to not call people "manchildren" for enjoying hobbies that we might not. It's not like hes in the team much these days anyway. Let him enjoy his hobby....the same one other adults around the world enjoy.

The era of "video games are for children" ended about twenty years ago....the age of the average player is 25. He tweets about this stuff but to claim its "aimed at children" is off the mark.

The man has a career, a house, a wife and a family that he supports. Seems responsible enough for me.

So yeah, that post ground my gears.

razorblunt

Meyler is making a decent supplementary income off of that. More power to him.

osarusan

Players that cannot manage to put the ball within the area when taking a corner, which is pretty much all of them.

It must be some mental thing, to need to extract every last millimetre, when it really makes no difference.

Ragnar Lothbrok

I have been a critic of the amount of exposure that the women's game in general gets in the media, examples of which are in this very thread. At times, I'll admit, I've verged on being sexist, such is my hatred not so much of their sport, but over the coverage given to it.

Less than 1 hour last night has seriously affected my thinking. I watched England v USA for the first half and then the last 10-15 minutes of the match.

I did see a few games in the World Cup a few years ago, when the standard was truly abysmal, but if last night's match is anything to go by, it's improved beyond recognition since then. This is probably due in no small part to the increased coverage that I have so vehemently condemned in the past.

So, the thing in football that now grinds my gears is that I've been so wrong to write off something that could actually benefit the game I love. There are probably a few things that the women's game could teach the men's game, such as an apparent lack of cynicism and a more respectful approach to referees (even allowing for the Cameroon team antics).

Yes, it was less than a full match I watched, but I was hugely impressed with the bit I saw.

NIMAN

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

I have been a critic of the amount of exposure that the women's game in general gets in the media, examples of which are in this very thread. At times, I'll admit, I've verged on being sexist, such is my hatred not so much of their sport, but over the coverage given to it.

Less than 1 hour last night has seriously affected my thinking. I watched England v USA for the first half and then the last 10-15 minutes of the match.

I did see a few games in the World Cup a few years ago, when the standard was truly abysmal, but if last night's match is anything to go by, it's improved beyond recognition since then. This is probably due in no small part to the increased coverage that I have so vehemently condemned in the past.

So, the thing in football that now grinds my gears is that I've been so wrong to write off something that could actually benefit the game I love. There are probably a few things that the women's game could teach the men's game, such as an apparent lack of cynicism and a more respectful approach to referees (even allowing for the Cameroon team antics).

Yes, it was less than a full match I watched, but I was hugely impressed with the bit I saw.

UEFA/FIFA could fix that issue in the mens game very quickly, if the will was there.

Its a simple one.

Omackeral

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

So, the thing in football that now grinds my gears is that I've been so wrong to write off something that could actually benefit the game I love.

Same could apply to attending a few LOI games actually. Any neutrals/first timers I've brought have enjoyed not only the football itself but the general buzz and social aspect of it too. People writing a whole swathe or subsection of the game of as sh*te without having checked it out in a long, long while are gear grinders.

And then benefits you mention of more folks getting involved would actually definitely improve the game here too.

Ragnar Lothbrok

Omackeral wrote: »

Same could apply to attending a few LOI games actually. Any neutrals/first timers I've brought have enjoyed not only the football itself but the general buzz and social aspect of it too. People writing a whole swathe or subsection of the game of as sh*te without having checked it out in a long, long while are gear grinders.

And then benefits you mention of more folks getting involved would actually definitely improve the game here too.

I daren't bring any Newbies to Turner's Cross this season - they'd never go to an LOI game again

Omackeral

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

I daren't bring any Newbies to Turner's Cross this season - they'd never go to an LOI game again

Wait til ya start the next club, get them on board then :pac:

Ragnar Lothbrok

Omackeral wrote: »

Wait til ya start the next club, get them on board then :pac:

Below the belt, Mackeral