Things In Football That Grind Your Gears

Liberta Per Gli Ultra

Liberta Per Gli Ultra wrote: »

Those who go to games (every week, not some football tourist) place a high level of importance on moments (joyous and painful), atmosphere, emotion, ebb and flow, etc.. Many players also place a high importance on those natural elements of football.
...
To a person who lives football through a screen, known in this country as a barstooler, the above seems irrelevant compared to the quest for justice (selective justice, aka bullsh*t).

As someone who went to most matches in Turner's Cross in the 00s I still - like many fans of live football - remember Damien Richardson's infamous "ridden rock solid" outburst. That was after City were dumped out of the Cup by a bad decision, during a run of bad decisions. I never got the sense that City fans were happy enough to tolerate them because they were part of the natural "emotion, ebb and flow, etc.", we'd have been delighted with the idea that the more egregious ones were subject to review.

As a matter of curiosity, as you keep dismissing support for VAR as limited to fans who watch games on TV, how many games with VAR have you gone to and how has it affected your experience?

Wrongway1985

Liberta Per Gli Ultra wrote: »

Those who go to games (every week, not some football tourist) place a high level of importance on moments (joyous and painful), atmosphere, emotion, ebb and flow, etc.. Many players also place a high importance on those natural elements of football

The VAR system is only used in the most mainstream leagues that the most productive clubs competing obviously aren't filling their grounds with just locals so how on earth does this correspond with Irish football fans who go to games regularly??

Ragnar Lothbrok

The arguing about VAR now is even worse than it was before it was introduced

(I was 100% in favour before it was introduced, now I hate it - and I'm a Cork City season ticket holder, before anyone accuses me of being a barstooler!)

citytillidie

But is it VAR or the laws of the game? VAR only highlights the laws

osarusan

citytillidie wrote: »

But is it VAR or the laws of the game? VAR only highlights the laws

I agree with this. VAR just causes the laws to be analysed like never before.

Now that the tech is there for such forensic analysis, the laws need to be rewritten.

bucketybuck

Rewrite the laws of the game so that they can justify a gimmick that was always a solution in search of a problem.

Wrongway1985

bucketybuck wrote: »

Rewrite the laws of the game so that they can justify a gimmick that was always a solution in search of a problem.

Might actually have some weight in that if they didn't constantly change the rules...Oh but they do.

Here...

No Players in wall for frees
Cards for managers
Players must leave at closest pitch exit
Coin toss options
Goalies must have one foot on line for a pen
Drop ball not to be contested
Accidental handballs by attackers an offence (yup even this hot topic one)

...These are just changes that were made just last year!!

HalloweenJack

People who don't know the rules, whether they are playing or watching.

Shanotheslayer

HalloweenJack wrote: »

People who don't know the rules, whether they are playing or watching.

People who don't know they're actually called Laws

RicketyCricket

Ex Man Utd players and fans that won't criticise Ole, despite the fact he is way out of his depth at the club. There's a reason he is not being given any money to spend. Past success is blinding people to the fact that Woodward and Glazers are bleeding the club dry. I am no fan of Man U but FFS grow a pair, take your club back before its lost.

derossi

Professional foul. I was gonna do a big rant but in small terms, i'll foul you but because you were attacking it's a P foul.

j8wk2feszrnpao

derossi wrote: »

Professional foul. I was gonna do a big rant but in small terms, i'll foul you but because you were attacking it's a P foul.

Federico Valverde was celebrated for doing it in the Supercopa. It was cheating, and a horrible tackle, but no major outcry.

jacool

Managers who cannot say that their player has committed a serious foul.
I've just watched Leigh Griffith turn around and blatantly stamp on an opponent, while lifting his other foot in the air, so I bet it was painful, but Neil Lennon says he only pushed him. Embarrassing!

Esse85

Seeing a manager like Jose Mourinho in a Paddy Power TV ad promoting gambling.

Why?

Haven't you made enough money over the years?

eh i dunno

Esse85 wrote: »

Seeing a manager like Jose Mourinho in a Paddy Power TV ad promoting gambling.

Why?

Haven't you made enough money over the years?

Would be thinking the same when I see Jose doing punditry on sky. Do you really need that money?

joeguevara

eh i dunno wrote: »

Would be thinking the same when I see Jose doing punditry on sky. Do you really need that money?

Jose net worth is close to 100 million. He is earning 15 million a year at spurs which (if I’m correct) about 288k a week which is circa 90k more a week than Harry Kane who is the top paid player. Jose also has a number of commercial contracts with Jaguar, Heineken, EA Sports and some random coffee place to name a few.

The fact he was a pundit on Sky made perfect sense though. He commented that he needed to go back to football basics and study the game again. What better place to do that than a football analyst in a company that has the best data, cameras, statistics, affiliates, statisticians and analysts in the world. If he didn’t have access to that, he would find nearly impossible to collate whatever information he needed. Also keeping profile is still important.

Fitz*

Jose's image at the end of his United (and Chelsea) tenure was that of a tired, angry, grumpy man who's ideas were out of date.

Jose does comical TV ad for Paddy Power & acts all jovial after getting a new job on Sky while doing punditry for them, giving off an image of being a man who has learnt from his errors. Kept his name in the hat for any potential jobs.

Jose gets a job at a club and continued this jovial new image of 'the happy one', queuing loads of articles about how he has changed. A new Jose, who is not the grumpy man he was before.

Image changed, new job and extra money in the pocket. It all worked out for him.

NIMAN

Jose.

eh i dunno

eh i dunno wrote: »

Would be thinking the same when I see Jose doing punditry on sky. Do you really need that money?

rather listen to him than average at best players like Jamie Redknapp, Jenas etc

wadacrack

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Federico Valverde was celebrated for doing it in the Supercopa. It was cheating, and a horrible tackle, but no major outcry.

Very strange. Imagine if we see more of that. Players more like to end up with serious injury

MrKingsley

When Sky calls it "the so-called big 6....". You guys made it up for Christ's sake

Salvation Tambourine

Martin Tyler today after Robertson raised his boot a little but didn't connect with the West Ham player, no free kick was given, it was a non-event. Tyler then said something like this;

Tyler: Well if you start giving red cards for things like that it's crazy
Smith: Well with VAR nowadays...

No one was saying it was a foul, let alone a red card. It was bizarre.

I do find it funny searching him name on Twitter during any match he's commentating on, everyone seems to think he hates their team. He's not biased, just awful.

GBX

Nokotan wrote: »

Martin Tyler today after Robertson raised his boot a little but didn't connect with the West Ham player, no free kick was given, it was a non-event. Tyler then said something like this;

Tyler: Well if you start giving red cards for things like that it's crazy
Smith: Well with VAR nowadays...

No one was saying it was a foul, let alone a red card. It was bizarre.

I do find it funny searching him name on Twitter during any match he's commentating on, everyone seems to think he hates their team. He's not biased, just awful.

Listening to Martin Tyler. That's it for me.

Iang87

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Federico Valverde was celebrated for doing it in the Supercopa. It was cheating, and a horrible tackle, but no major outcry.

Calling something cheating when you receive the punishment bothers me.If you believe that is cheating then you can safely say that every player at every level that has ever played the game is in fact a cheat.

Suarez similarly in the world cup v Ghana. Not cheating. Broke the rules and was punished to the full extent of the rules.

Why have a major outcry its a team sport. In that moment he sacrifices his place on the field to ensure his team didnt lose. It should be rightly applauded.

I've seen Solsjkaer get a standing ovation at Old Trafford for something similar. Rightly so. If i'm not mistaken Reyes cleaned out Cristiano Ronaldo clear through on goal in the cup final in 2005 getting a red card for himself but Arsenal won on penalties. Rightly applauded.

We admire players the world over thinking so clearly in moments of pressure. In those moments of guaranteed loss these players chose I want my team to win even if i'm not here to celebrate it and chose that option. Fantastic.

bucketybuck

Iang87 wrote: »

Calling something cheating when you receive the punishment bothers me.If you believe that is cheating then you can safely say that every player at every level that has ever played the game is in fact a cheat.

Suarez similarly in the world cup v Ghana. Not cheating. Broke the rules and was punished to the full extent of the rules.

I really don't know what you are talking about? So its only cheating if you get away with it?

Is Lance Armstrong not a cheat then?

Iang87

bucketybuck wrote: »

I really don't know what you are talking about? So its only cheating if you get away with it?

Is Lance Armstrong not a cheat then?

No there's rules in the game. If you act outside the rules and get punished it doesn't make you a cheat.

You cant compare drug use to acting in the rules of a specific game.

Ben Johnson juiced up to his tits winning Olympic gold with bright yellow eyes can't be compared to a defender pulling a forward down cos he got wrong side of you in the last minute.

For me someone being a cheat is when someone is aware that their ability is not enough so have to do something external to the game to win. Drug use, paying off referees etc. Anything that happens on the field is fair game provided its adequately punished as set out in the rules of the game

Weepsie

It's cheating, if it wasn't, there wouldnt be laws against it. Whether or not you get away with is a different matter.

Iang87

I guess my biggest issue is when you then call the player a cheat.

Suarez being deemed a cheat for the handball. Of all the sticks to beat him with, to use the one where he misses a world cup semi as a result seems ridiculous.

Iang87

Iang87 wrote: »

For me someone being a cheat is when someone is aware that their ability is not enough so have to do something external to the game to win. Drug use, paying off referees etc. Anything that happens on the field is fair game provided its adequately punished as set out in the rules of the game

Your issue isn't so much about football but with the English language.

You are entitled to your interpretation of the word "cheat", but as a matter of fact it is incorrect.

The word cheat can be applied to what Suarez did. Being caught doesn't mean the cheating did not take place.

Iang87

I understand what you're saying but the issue when you use that language is the language gets diluted.

Calling 5,000 soccer players cheats for fouling someone will cause something like Lance Armstrong cheating to be somewhat less.

I just think it's the wrong term to be used and it annoys me as I'd hazard a guess that anyone playing any competitive team sport has cheated then

osarusan

If it's as simple as breaking the laws of the game, then every footballer who ever gave away a free-kick is a cheat.

If you were to ask 1000 football fans what 'cheating in football' means to them, what themes would emerge from their responses? I'd guess that there would be a theme of trying to get away with something by doing it as covertly as possible.

Suarez didn't really try to get away with it, it was blatant desperation handball.

ozzy jr

osarusan wrote: »

If it's as simple as breaking the laws of the game, then every footballer who ever gave away a free-kick is a cheat.

If you were to ask 1000 football fans what 'cheating in football' means to them, what themes would emerge from their responses? I'd guess that there would be a theme of trying to get away with something by doing it as covertly as possible.

Suarez didn't really try to get away with it, it was blatant desperation handball.

If you asked 1000 Irish fans most would say "Terry Henry"

Weepsie

osarusan wrote: »

If it's as simple as breaking the laws of the game, then every footballer who ever gave away a free-kick is a cheat.

If you were to ask 1000 football fans what 'cheating in football' means to them, what themes would emerge from their responses? I'd guess that there would be a theme of trying to get away with something by doing it as covertly as possible.

Suarez didn't really try to get away with it, it was blatant desperation handball.

It is that simple that. Breaking the rules is generally to gain an advantage and the very definition of cheating.

You can have drug cheats, diving cheats, dirty cheats (people who hack you down at all costs), etc etc.

There are lots of incidental fouls in football that's not cheating, but a professional foul, a deliberate handball, a dive, etc are all forms of cheating one way or the other.

Just because they're common, doesn't change the very definition of cheating.

There's obviously levels of acceptability, and we all know that if Keane handled the ball for Richard Dunne to smack it into the French net in2009 we'd be calling them legends but they'd still have cheated

Guy:Incognito

osarusan wrote: »

If it's as simple as breaking the laws of the game, then every footballer who ever gave away a free-kick is a cheat.

Doing it deliberately is cheating. Thats the difference. Making an attempt to tackle someone and ending up fouling them isnt cheating.

If you decide you hate someone and go stab them to death, thats murder. If you make a mistake in your car and run someone over, killing them, thats not murder. Theyre still dead but its a different situation.

dundalkfc10

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Doing it deliberately is cheating. Thats the difference. Making an attempt to tackle someone and ending up fouling them isnt cheating.

If you decide you hate someone and go stab them to death, thats murder. If you make a mistake in your car and run someone over, killing them, thats not murder. Theyre still dead but its a different situation.

So if a forward fouls the defender at his own corner flag in injury time to try waste a bit of time, he is a cheat?

Guy:Incognito

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

So if a forward fouls the defender at his own corner flag in injury time to try waste a bit of time, he is a cheat?

Does he just go over and kick him or did he try win the ball and just caught him wrong?

dundalkfc10

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Does he just go over and kick him or did he try win the ball and just caught him wrong?

Tactical foul, like alot of fouls that happen during the game. Defenders pulling strikers jerseys etc, full back stealing 5 yards on a throw in, defenders on a free kick etc....

All cheats

osarusan

Weepsie wrote: »

There are lots of incidental fouls in football that's not cheating, but a professional foul, a deliberate handball, a dive, etc are all forms of cheating one way or the other.

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Doing it deliberately is cheating.

I obviously have a different, or narrower, idea of what constitutes cheating in a football context that both of you, as I don't agree, I don't see all deliberate fouls as cheating.

But that's a conceptual difference, so not really much point going into it I think.

callaway92

'It's not the greatest penalty; it's right down the middle'.

I mean... that was the point of the pen.

joeguevara

osarusan wrote: »

I obviously have a different, or narrower, idea of what constitutes cheating in a football context that both of you, as I don't agree, I don't see all deliberate fouls as cheating.

But that's a conceptual difference, so not really much point going into it I think.

I agree with you. If a player is going through and you pull them back, or trip them is seen as taken one for the team and is part and parcel of the game. But stopping a goal with your hand or deliberately injuring a player is cheating. The former isn’t nice but somewhat acceptable (like are you just going to let them past) but the latter is reprehensible.

I also think acting to get a player sent off is one of the lowest things in football. Diving too.

razorblunt

Alan Greene hits the nail on the head here.
BantzBantzBantz

https://twitter.com/henrywinter/status/1237086039996608513?s=20

Iang87

razorblunt wrote: »

Alan Greene hits the nail on the head here.
BantzBantzBantz

https://twitter.com/henrywinter/status/1237086039996608513?s=20

Haven't read the article but yes, yes and yes.

Things like showboat on Soccer AM where its about a piece of skill. This feeding into a Gif generation of simpletons where it appears it is more important to make someone look foolish than actually try to score or do the correct thing on the pitch.

This is sports the world over unfortunately I feel. Every second or 3rd morning i'd look at twitter and see an NBA clip of someone "out here breaking ankles" and then go and check to score to find out the ankle breaker lost by 35 points but ankles were broken so he's the hero.

Seeing the same with soccer these days

Guy:Incognito

Players taking corners taking the time to try get every last half mm of the ball to the edge of the quadrant is grating on me for some reason. Just put the fupping thing down on the line and take the poxy corner.

KH25

I’m sure this has been said already, but Keith Andrews on commentary. He’s absolutely dreadful.

y0ssar1an22

KH25 wrote: »

I’m sure this has been said already, but Keith Andrews on commentary. He’s absolutely dreadful.

awful stuff from him tonight. thought he might of had his house on liverpool qualifying with some of his commentary

BonnieSituation

razorblunt wrote: »

Alan Greene hits the nail on the head here.
BantzBantzBantz

https://twitter.com/henrywinter/status/1237086039996608513?s=20

Cheltenham on ITV has been absolute puke and it's a follow on from how sports commentary is going appealing to young shítheads on mobile phones. Well, actually, I'm not sure who they're trying to appeal to.

---

As it has, as it shall always ever be, away goals counting in extra time still drives me bananas.

The odd "I don't know how people can even think about football at the moment" post here.

Well, it's a football forum, it's not really the place to analyse pandemics, the Syrian conflict, homelessness, global warming or the other issues that are obviously more important than football.

Mitch Connor

Deleted User wrote: »

The odd "I don't know how people can even think about football at the moment" post here.

Well, it's a football forum, it's not really the place to analyse pandemics, the Syrian conflict, homelessness, global warming or the other issues that are obviously more important than football.

I remember arguing with a certain someone (not you!) in the United thread about some BS they said, and they retorted with (paraphrasing) 'Its not wirth arguing this while those poor kids are stuck in the mine'.

Salvation Tambourine

Deleted User wrote: »

The odd "I don't know how people can even think about football at the moment" post here.

Well, it's a football forum, it's not really the place to analyse pandemics, the Syrian conflict, homelessness, global warming or the other issues that are obviously more important than football.

Jonathan Liew on the Guardian Football Weekly was so miserable. He's there to provide people with relief from all this, not a constant reminder. Fair enough if the conversation is around what to do during and after the virus but to be constantly told that nothing else matters was mind numbing.

I 100% agree with what you are saying. Most comments about football seem to be prefaced with this. It's not like I ask my wife "I know there are much more important things in the world but would you like a cup of tea?". People should be able to talk about things they like without having to confirm that it is indeed not as important as thousand of people losing their lives.

HalloweenJack

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52951920
This kind of lazy reporting:

A rally by Italian far-right extremists and hardcore football fans over the government's response to coronavirus has turned briefly violent.

I've read through the piece a few times and I've looked at the photos and I don't see any proof of this claim. It feels like a lazy stereotype and/or an attempt to discredit 'hardcore' football fans.

I know the UK doesn't have much of a history when it comes to ultras but it seems to be given negative connotations in the British media in the hopes of stopping it catching on.

I wasn't at the protest, maybe there were football fans there, but its lazy and irresponsible to report something without any evidence and it just plays into the stereotype that ultras are violent.