General Premier League Thread 2019-20

Mitch Connor

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

Selective memory then, Utd should have had at least 2 red cards, look it up or carry on in blissful ignorance!

Good thing Arsenal never benefited from poor reffing.

Potential Underachiever

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Good thing Arsenal never benefited from poor reffing.

Completely moot point to what's being discussed.

Oranage2

fyfe79 wrote: »

Then why would you post this in the PL thread and not your own thread?

And people like to say it's just Utd and LFC fans?

Wow, I apologize if I made anyone upset with my comment, I didn't realize some people are sosensitive.

Oranage2

JoshRosen wrote: »

Would totally disagree with that statement. A team could feasibly remain unbeaten all season and get relegated. Would that still constitute as a ‘really great team’ if they did?

Let me ask you a question before I answer yours.

Hypothetically if a team won the league and didn't lose a game would you consider that a great team?

Mitch Connor

Oranage2 wrote: »

Let me ask you a question before I answer yours.

Hypothetically if a team won the league and didn't lose a game would you consider that a great team?

A team that wins the league is a great team.

I think there are other teams that have had better seasons than that Arsenal side.

Liam O

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

Completely moot point to what's being discussed.

You said it was bias though.

I'd say you would see 10 red cards a game in those old United and Arsenal ones if you looked close enough.

The Rio one I'd give but punishments, especially in big games, especially with these 2 teams involved were much more loose back then.

~Rebel~

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

i agree that it should be a red card.

how would you define intentionally coughing at a player though?

Everyone knows at this stage how you're supposed to cough - into your elbow, or armpit. Do anything other than that, risk a card.

Drumpot wrote: »

What’s gonna happen with players who clear their noses by putting their finger on one side and clearing out of the other. I can see there being a few genuine mistakes Getting people in trouble.

I'd say there'll be a degree of common sense - if you need to do something like that, do it actively away from other people.

We do also have to remember that the entire match situation is taking place under the explicit expectation that every single member of each team has been tested and confirmed negative for the virus before they take the field. So this stuff is bonus behavior, more-so to stop blaggarding, than to actually prevent infection.


The behaviour is much more relevant at training level, where you would expect players are less likely to be actively acting the bollocks against their own teammates. Can easily impose a 'walk over the sideline if you're gonna clear your nose" policy in that case.

~Rebel~

Oranage2 wrote: »

Wow, I apologize if I made anyone upset with my comment, I didn't realize some people are sosensitive.

Really? A spate of feedback threads for the past month on issues like post-thanks, and it didn't occur that people are conscious of other peoples motivations and actions?

Nonetheless, that Arsenal team was excellent. Rather than showing how good a team could be at their best, their achievement was to show how good a team could be at their worst. Going unbeaten means for that every time you were rubbish, had a bunch of players just not feeling it, or injuries, or a questionable ref, that they managed to at least snatch a draw.

Oranage2

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Really? A spate of feedback threads for the past month on issues like post-thanks, and it didn't occur that people are conscious of other peoples motivations and actions?

Sorry, I wasn't in a good head space recently so I took a month or two off boards, I saw 1 thread that I made a suggestion for but I don't think I really got a good feel about the thread.

Was there an outcome to that thread, are fun trivial posts not allowed now?

Come on guys, if someone thanking a post you don't like is upsetting you then it's time to take a little break.

~Rebel~

Oranage2 wrote: »

Sorry, I wasn't in a good head space recently so I took a month or two off boards, I saw 1 thread that I made a suggestion for but I don't think I really got a good feel about the thread.

Was there an outcome to that thread, are fun trivial posts not allowed now?

Come on guys, if someone thanking a post you don't like is upsetting you then it's time to take a little break.

It's been tense!
Just what ya need during a pandemic, eh?

Rock77

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

Selective memory then, Utd should have had at least 2 red cards, look it up or carry on in blissful ignorance!

Edit : Found this.. watch it and tell me it was a dodgy pen and nothing more, I dare you!

Yeah a couple more dodgy ones in there Allright. Rio should have got a red but I can see how the ref makes his call (very close to being shoulder to shoulder)

Ruud could have got red ( I’d blame the Linesman though, not the ref)

Rock77

Oranage2 wrote: »

Sorry, I wasn't in a good head space recently so I took a month or two off boards, I saw 1 thread that I made a suggestion for but I don't think I really got a good feel about the thread.

Was there an outcome to that thread, are fun trivial posts not allowed now?

Come on guys, if someone thanking a post you don't like is upsetting you then it's time to take a little break.

Don’t mind people getting their knickers in a twist!

You got a different conversation going!! Well done and welcome back..

Potential Underachiever

Liam O wrote: »

You said it was bias though.

I'd say you would see 10 red cards a game in those old United and Arsenal ones if you looked close enough.

The Rio one I'd give but punishments, especially in big games, especially with these 2 teams involved were much more loose back then.

We're getting somewhere now, you concede the penalty was a dive presumably and that Rio should have been sent off, now at 2.50 in the video RVN goes studs first into Coles knee, clear red card as well. So in summary at least 2 reds and awful dive pen, I would say it was biased officiating. It was worse than the montreal screwjob! Excuse the reference if you don't like wrestling!

bangkok

Rock77 wrote: »

Yeah a couple more dodgy ones in there Allright. Rio should have got a red but I can see how the ref makes his call (very close to being shoulder to shoulder)

Ruud could have got red ( I’d blame the Linesman though, not the ref)

rules of the game have changed a lot since then.

a lot of them tackles were let go in the past. red card tackles today

Drumpot

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

We're getting somewhere now, you concede the penalty was a dive presumably and that Rio should have been sent off, now at 2.50 in the video RVN goes studs first into Coles knee, clear red card as well. So in summary at least 2 reds and awful dive pen, I would say it was biased officiating. It was worse than the montreal screwjob! Excuse the reference if you don't like wrestling!

I remember that incident



I get it suits you to just focus on one game, but its an irrelevant point if you dont accept that sometimes teams get the breaks, other times they dont and home advantage (certainly back then before ref scrutiny) was considered an advantage with refs for most big clubs (not just united).

It worked both ways, sometimes in favour of United, other times in favour of Arsenal. (like Uniteds wrongly dissalowed goal v Arsenal in Semi final first FA cup game in 1999 which led to a replay that United could of done without in that treble winning season. Course we wouldnt of gotten that epic replay with Giggsys classic winner ).

Potential Underachiever

Drumpot wrote: »

I remember that incident


I get it suits you to just focus on one game, but its an irrelevant point if you dont accept that sometimes teams get the breaks, other times they dont and home advantage (certainly back then before ref scrutiny) was considered an advantage with refs for most big clubs (not just united).

It worked both ways, sometimes in favour of United, other times in favour of Arsenal. (like Uniteds wrongly dissalowed goal v Arsenal in Semi final first FA cup game in 1999 which led to a replay that United could of done without in that treble winning season. Course we wouldnt of gotten that epic replay with Giggsys classic winner ).

I'm just focusing on that game as it was brought up in conversation today, obviously over the years every team has been stitched up or got favourable decisions, that's so obvious it doesn't really need to be stated tbh.

Rock77

bangkok wrote: »

rules of the game have changed a lot since then.

a lot of them tackles were let go in the past. red card tackles today

I take your point in general but Rio was last man, if it was a foul it was red.

If the ref or linesman see Ruuds tackle that’s also red, even back then.

Drumpot

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

I'm just focusing on that game as it was brought up in conversation today, obviously over the years every team has been stitched up or got favourable decisions, that's so obvious it doesn't really need to be stated tbh.

You said arsenal were “ shafted out of a record”. If we went through all arsenals unbeaten games I’d imagine there might be one or two games when arsenal got decisions that helped that unbeaten run. I was only highlighting moments I remember because I don’t watch arsenal games so can’t quote games from their unbeaten season. Perhaps the United game that you feel was unfair was just Karma or a rebalance.

Fitz*

JoshRosen wrote: »

Would totally disagree with that statement. A team could feasibly remain unbeaten all season and get relegated. Would that still constitute as a ‘really great team’ if they did?

Not quite as dramatic as being relegated but in the 1978-1979 season, Perugia went unbeaten, and finished 2nd.

Mitch Connor

Drumpot wrote: »

You said arsenal were “ shafted out of a record”. If we went through all arsenals unbeaten games I’d imagine there might be one or two games when arsenal got decisions that helped that unbeaten run. I was only highlighting moments I remember because I don’t watch arsenal games so can’t quote games from their unbeaten season. Perhaps the United game that you feel was unfair was just Karma or a rebalance.

pires last min dive to win a penalty and rescue point vs Portsmouth.

KaiserGunner

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

Selective memory then, Utd should have had at least 2 red cards, look it up or carry on in blissful ignorance!

Edit : Found this.. watch it and tell me it was a dodgy pen and nothing more, I dare you!

And to think Mike Riley is the head of the PGMOL! No wonder the referees in the premier league are so poor and that they have had nothing but issues when it comes to their use of VAR.
That “performance “ by him that day, along with the referee in the Chelsea V Barcelona champions league semi final years ago are the two worst refereeing performances that I’ve ever seen.

5starpool

Drumpot wrote: »

I was thinking at stuff like corners or moments in a match where a player just had a second to clear their nose and they do it anywhere on a pitch (not necessarily on somebody). Then there’s a tussle near that spot and questions over whether the area was “contaminated”.

It’s like at birthday parties where blowing on a cake may become a big no no, I’m just wondering what things are going to be big issues at the start until things settle into a reasonable new norm.

In world cups we can have breaks where players take a drink. Now we can have breaks where players can blow their nose and wash their hands.

Rock77

KaiserGunner wrote: »

And to think Mike Riley is the head of the PGMOL! No wonder the referees in the premier league are so poor and that they have had nothing but issues when it comes to their use of VAR.
That “performance “ by him that day, along with the referee in the Chelsea V Barcelona champions league semi final years ago are the two worst refereeing performances that I’ve ever seen.

A bit harsh in my opinion, he got one big call wrong(Rio)

The peno looked clear to everyone until the 2nd or 3rd replay!

The Ruud one wasn’t very obvious ( it was a bit of a sly one rather than a 2 footed lunge or something)

The rest were fouls, that were given... I’m sure Arsenal players kicked Utd lads in the same game..

Mitch Connor

I've had to watch Martin Atkinson ref against United a few times, games vs Chelsea with him in charge have been an absolute joke at times.

bangkok

Rock77 wrote: »

I take your point in general but Rio was last man, if it was a foul it was red.

If the ref or linesman see Ruuds tackle that’s also red, even back then.

was it a foul though? 2 players coming together, one over 6ft the other prob 5'8

Rock77

bangkok wrote: »

was it a foul though? 2 players coming together, one over 6ft the other prob 5'8

The ref didn’t think it was anyway..

I think it was a foul, Arsenal player is running straight onto the ball, Rio comes in from the side and takes him out.

And I don’t think it matters how tall either player is..

If that was Rashford clear through and Virgil took him out like that I would want him sent off, arrested and banned for life!

Drumpot

5starpool wrote: »

In world cups we can have breaks where players take a drink. Now we can have breaks where players can blow their nose and wash their hands.

Yeh , there maybe a few tweaks needed as they get more familiar with managing things. Players taking huge gulps of water and spitting most of it out onto ground... Could cause a riot but I’m sure common sense will prevail after some early crazy reactions.

Cantona's Collars

https://twitter.com/GFFN/status/1261364741399773185

TitianGerm

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

https://twitter.com/GFFN/status/1261364741399773185

He didn't last to long at Juventus.

bangkok

TitianGerm wrote: »

He didn't last to long at Juventus.

cant see him lasting long wherever he goes. going to Everton for the money

TitianGerm

bangkok wrote: »

cant see him lasting long wherever he goes. going to Everton for the money

Thought he's getting paid massive money at Juve?

Fitz*

His mam is meant to be a massive problem, and is also his agent. Used to work with Ancelotti, so that could be a big incentive for both of them.

Played with Man City's academy but I'm not sure if he counts as homegrown or not. I don't think he played in the same academy team as Karius though, there might have been a year between them.

He would certainly be an upgrade on Sigurdsson IMO.

bangkok

TitianGerm wrote: »

Thought he's getting paid massive money at Juve?

he prob is but he is basically gone on strike now, he is a wasted talent. Everton will prob pay him a huge salary but see what happens, maybe anchelotti or the club dont want him around

c.p.w.g.w

bangkok wrote: »

he prob is but he is basically gone on strike now, he is a wasted talent. Everton will prob pay him a huge salary but see what happens, maybe anchelotti or the club dont want him around

His toxic, he'll end up in china soon getting a massive wage and wasting his talent

5starpool

Drumpot wrote: »

Yeh , there maybe a few tweaks needed as they get more familiar with managing things. Players taking huge gulps of water and spitting most of it out onto ground... Could cause a riot but I’m sure common sense will prevail after some early crazy reactions.

If they are allowing football they can't create these mad offences all of a sudden. They can encourage players not to gob on the pitch, but carding them for what was fine 3 months ago is mad given that they'll be fondling each other practically at corners.

~Rebel~

Drumpot wrote: »

Yeh , there maybe a few tweaks needed as they get more familiar with managing things. Players taking huge gulps of water and spitting most of it out onto ground... Could cause a riot but I’m sure common sense will prevail after some early crazy reactions.

Again though, every single player on the field will be confirmed Covid-negative.
Being on a premier league field should actually be the safest place in the country.

These things are relevant for training however.

Drumpot

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Again though, every single player on the field will be confirmed Covid-negative.
Being on a premier league field should actually be the safest place in the country.

These things are relevant for training however.

That’s true.

I suppose I’m just wondering if there will be an over reaction Moment after football goes back.

Mitch Connor

5starpool wrote: »

If they are allowing football they can't create these mad offences all of a sudden. They can encourage players not to gob on the pitch, but carding them for what was fine 3 months ago is mad given that they'll be fondling each other practically at corners.

You could card them for unsportsman-like conduct, I would think. Sure it wouldn't have happened, or unlikely to, 3 months ago - but in the same way trying or feigning to hit a player is a cardable offence, so would deliberately coughing on them (deliberately spitting on them was already an offence)

Mitch Connor

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Again though, every single player on the field will be confirmed Covid-negative.
Being on a premier league field should actually be the safest place in the country.

These things are relevant for training however.

being negative doesn't actually mean you are clear - it just means the viral load is not high enough to spike the test (I understand that is the case), so you could test negative today and positive tomorrow, without that meaning you contracted in tonight.

I am not sure if you are contagious in the period a test wouldn't mark you positive (assuming after the point of viral load the test would mark 100% of cases)

Drumpot

Mitch Connor wrote: »

being negative doesn't actually mean you are clear - it just means the viral load is not high enough to spike the test (I understand that is the case), so you could test negative today and positive tomorrow, without that meaning you contracted in tonight.

I am not sure if you are contagious in the period a test wouldn't mark you positive (assuming after the point of viral load the test would mark 100% of cases)

I had this discussion with a friend regarding flying. Some countries are testing people when they arrive. But if what if they got infected at the airport on either end. By the time they are tested there wouldn’t be enough in their system to show up on a test.

I’m trying to be fair on this topic but the truth is that it’s still very early on in the virus research field and there are still things they don’t fully understand about it. It’s unfair and unreasonable to expect players to be happy to go back with so many things in the air (this new kids disease starting to make headlnes and no information on long term damage to the body).

Would anybody in here trust the EPL with their health/welfare when money is their only motive? You can’t trust the UK governments motive as they have been the worst in the world at managing the crisis. I don’t blame players for being reluctant to want to play in that environment or trusting either bodies.

Mitch Connor

Drumpot wrote: »

I had this discussion with a friend regarding flying. Some countries are testing people when they arrive. But if what if they got infected at the airport on either end. By the time they are tested there wouldn’t be enough in their system to show up on a test.

I’m trying to be fair on this topic but the truth is that it’s still very early on in the virus research field and there are still things they don’t fully understand about it. It’s unfair and unreasonable to expect players to be happy to go back with so many things in the air (this new kids disease starting to make headlnes and no information on long term damage to the body).

Would anybody in here trust the EPL with their health/welfare when money is their only motive? You can’t trust the UK governments motive as they have been the worst in the world at managing the crisis. I don’t blame players for being reluctant to want to play in that environment or trusting either bodies.

With all the medical people involved in the return of football, I don't think it is a case of trusting the PL, to be honest. Yes, the PL (and the clubs) will have an interest in surviving this crisis, as every business will and that will come down to money.

But the PL Medical Officers association, the PL Cheif Medical Officer and involvement of Goverment Medical officers as well, would point to due consideration of health and safety.

It will still come down to risk factor, and all those medical professionals could ultimately agree (and I think will need to) that the risk factor has been mitigated by safety protocols to an acceptable level.

But 'acceptable level' is exactly where the problem will stem from if/when we look back on this.

If something terrible happens it won't mean the acceptable level was too low, just as if nothing happens it means the acceptable level was correct or too high. they can only mitigate risk, not eliminate it.

I take precautions when I go shopping, but that doesn't mean i'm 100% safe by the time I get home.

Drumpot

Mitch Connor wrote: »

With all the medical people involved in the return of football, I don't think it is a case of trusting the PL, to be honest. Yes, the PL (and the clubs) will have an interest in surviving this crisis, as every business will and that will come down to money.

But the PL Medical Officers association, the PL Cheif Medical Officer and involvement of Goverment Medical officers as well, would point to due consideration of health and safety.

It will still come down to risk factor, and all those medical professionals could ultimately agree (and I think will need to) that the risk factor has been mitigated by safety protocols to an acceptable level.

But 'acceptable level' is exactly where the problem will stem from if/when we look back on this.

If something terrible happens it won't mean the acceptable level was too low, just as if nothing happens it means the acceptable level was correct or too high. they can only mitigate risk, not eliminate it.

I take precautions when I go shopping, but that doesn't mean i'm 100% safe by the time I get home.

I calculate out each risk to the shops aswell but I’m in control of that.

I’m not sure I share your confidence because medical professionals are involved. The culture within a profession determines how much their concerns are listened to. Think Trump or Uk response to the virus, Fauci is constantly at odds with Trump and the UK government is constantly saying they are following science but it’s clear they haven’t been listening to the science and basically winging it to open up economies.

But if we did want to put a positive spin I suppose a player might try to trust that the optics of a dead player would not be good for business for the EPL. That may be a reasonable enough motive for them to be more confident.

Still think it’s like the Swedish approach to a degree as there are still an awful lot of unknown things that may make going back now look like a bad call.

Mitch Connor

Drumpot wrote: »

I calculate out each risk to the shops aswell but I’m in control of that.

I’m not sure I share your confidence because medical professionals are involved. The culture within a profession determines how much their concerns are listened to. Think Trump or Uk response to the virus, Fauci is constantly at odds with Trump and the UK government is constantly saying they are following science but it’s clear they haven’t been listening to the science and basically winging it to open up economies.

But if we did want to put a positive spin I suppose a player might try to trust that the optics of a dead player would not be good for business for the EPL. That may be a reasonable enough motive for them to be more confident.

Still think it’s like the Swedish approach to a degree as there are still an awful lot of unknown things that may make going back now look like a bad call.

The PL listening to the MO's could be questionable, but I think the players will listen to them. So if the MO's aren't happy, then the players certainly won't be - and if neither group is happy the PL is fooked, whatever they think themselves.

The MO's are the key to a return, imo. the players won't listen to the CEOs, for the reasons you have stated/implied. They will listen to the MOs.

On top of the players listening to them, they are going to be the ones on the hook for any failures.

If something terrible happens, the PL will point at them and their advice/guidance and, ultimately, blame them (directly or indirectly). It will be their reputations and careers on the line. Even if the PL looked to railroad them, will that wash in 5 years when we look back on it - people will expect them to follow their conscience, their ethics, and speak up for the health of the players and staff put in their charge, their families and themselves.

In reality all they can (and should be expected) to do is lay out their concerns, understand as best as possible the risks, demand as best as possible safety protocols to mitigate those risks and lay out all the known science and risk factors to the players and staff that will be impacted. then everyone needs to come to an understanding and agreement based on all of that (play on or not).

ebbsy

Well the clubs want to play at their own grounds because of their own sponsorship deals there. The story about sporting integrity is bull****.

And if the likes of Sterling etc do not want to play, who cares ? Certainly not me.

One less hill for Liverpool to climb in my view.

Mitch Connor

ebbsy wrote: »

Well the clubs want to play at their own grounds because of their own sponsorship deals there. The story about sporting integrity is bull****.

And if the likes of Sterling etc do not want to play, who cares ? Certainly not me.

One less hill for Liverpool to climb in my view.

That reads that your care is predicated solely on Liverpool chances for winning.

Shanotheslayer

Mitch Connor wrote: »

That reads that your care is predicated solely on Liverpool chances for winning.

Are you surprised?

Do you think Liverpool fans would care half as much if they where 10th with nothing to play for?

That's not a go at ebbsy, but it makes sense as to why Liverpool fans primarily want the league to return.

I'd say a lot of people want football to return. Any sport at this stage tbh!

ebbsy

Mitch Connor wrote: »

That reads that your care is predicated solely on Liverpool chances for winning.

correct.

Cantona's Collars

ebbsy wrote: »

correct.

At least you are up front and honest about it.

Any more mention of the free to air games, or was that just rumours? Be great to see games on multiple stations when it returns next month.