Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

General Premier League Thread 2023-24 Mod Note in op 27/6/23 And 21/05/24

16869717374250

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,301 ✭✭✭McBain11


    No, by the way the offside rule is interpreted now (different phases for pass to Sterling, then pass to Jackson), the goal is perfectly legitimate.

    Which is complete and utter nonsense btw, and when you see the likes of Son goal tonight and hundreds of other goals over the past couple of seasons being ruled out for 1/2 cm offside calls it makes it all the more preposterous.

    That Jackson goal should 100 percent be disallowed if football law makers had any idea what they were doing anymore. He is purposely stealing about 5 yards on the Spurs CB by being offside. That 5 yard gap to the defender is the only reason he then scores.

    I saw Ronaldo score a goal for Madrid about 5/6 years ago where he was walking back out of the opposition penalty area. The ball was at the other end of the pitch. The opposition defence were on the half way line. Real played a clipped ball over the top to their winger, who ran on and squared it to Ronaldo who had a 40 yard offside head start on the opposition defenders. Ronaldo scores with opposition players unable to close that 40 yard offside gap in time. What a sport eh.

    The football law makers have destroyed the offside rule, the handball rule and in general most of the game of football itself.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,893 ✭✭✭TheRona


    The reality is that the officials are useless. How long did it take to call Dier offside? It was obvious to the naked eye.

    They should be called out for their incompetence. It's the only way improvements will come.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,887 ✭✭✭✭klose


    Easy to say that when he has nothing to complain about, if anything he should be thanking the refs for not sending off udogie and romero earlier on.


    Every offside goal was also meticulously scrutinised also. VAR were obviously worried about stealing the headlights for offside goals last night.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,979 ✭✭✭doc_17


    The naked eye isn’t the standard. The cameras aren’t always completely in line. The lines on the pitch aren’t always straight.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,510 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    yeah, not being a prick but let's wait and see when he has a game changing error against him.

    Hugely likeable guy tho and a breath of fresh air



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,798 ✭✭✭Ottoman_1000


    But that interpretation has been around since the rule was introduced over a 100 years ago. It was not the law makers messing up the offside rule since VAR was introduced that brought up this problem, which is what I think your post is trying to suggest. There's strikers down through the years who have made a career out of goal poaching and waiting for the right time to get back in play. I've no issue with strikers scoring goals like that... they're making a meal of trying to officiate the offside rule as it is, the last thing we want to do is add another layer to that!

    Post edited by Ottoman_1000 on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,670 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    The naked eye is the standard when it comes to the linesman - he doesn't have lines to guide him if/when he raises his flag. One of things that annoys me about VAR is the phrase "clear and obvious error" - if you need lines drawn on the pitch then it's gone beyond "clear and obvious".

    That said, I think they got all the offside decisions correct lats night, so that's a stop forward. Now if we could just start identify the clear and obvious red cards that crop up every weekend, we'd be going in the right direction.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,389 ✭✭✭✭TitianGerm


    Clear and obvious doesn't apply to the offside rule as far as I know.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,038 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    Exactly. Clear and obvious only relates to issues where the VAR team are interjecting to overrule the refs decisions - stuff like red cards or pen shouts. For offsides they always do a full check and give the theoretically objective outcome based on the lines, entirely irrespective of the call on the field.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,330 ✭✭✭Did you smash it


    Not sure if he did, he got booked but that could have been for any of his coaching staff’s actions as that’s how the disciplinary procedure works now.


    maybe it was for what ange did, I don’t know.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,747 ✭✭✭✭AdamD


    Easy to say when Spurs actually got away with a load of decisions last night. Could have had 2 reds in the first half. Quite the performance from their manager though, some of the most ridiculous tactics I've ever seen. Chelsea were toothless, if Spurs sit back at 1-1 they probably get a draw.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,893 ✭✭✭TheRona


    Yeah, but my naked eye could easily tell last night, and my naked eye was correct.

    My point is how long it takes to call an offside. In this day and age it should be fast and efficient like in other sports. We shouldn't be waiting for some guy to draw some lines (if he remembers that he is supposed to draw them, and where he is supposed to draw them).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,516 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    It was surprisingly marginal - Dier was way offside when compared to the defenders close to him (which is where your naked eye will naturally be drawn to). However it was quite tight against a defender on the other side of the penalty box, really wasn't a naked eye thing imo. Clearly they are erring on the side of caution at the moment, and taking the time to get it correct. Doubtless they'll be put under pressure to quicken it up, and this will lead to another mistake, at which stage they'll go into slow-it-down mode again.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,798 ✭✭✭Ottoman_1000


    Why was the system used during the world cup not expanded further? That seemed to be fully automated, and no need for someone to spend their time trying to draw lines in fear they may have picked something up wrong. Holistically I actually don’t mind the offside rule with VAR, yes its annoying if someone is a cm offside, but in theory it should be the same for every single team, those fine margin calls will go against you one week and for you the next. My main problem with it currently, is the time it takes, and the focus the media/Sky/BT etc scrutinise the offside decisions and speak at length about each call. Just roll out the system used in the world cup, let the computer do its thing and everyone just move on after a call, none of this “oh buts its only a inch” or whatever from the commentary box and then the over analysis at half time or full time or what ever my be the call. 



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,175 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    gas



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭Fitz*


    The (overall 20) PL clubs voted against it.

    I'd take a guess that there was a split in the vote for/against it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,330 ✭✭✭Did you smash it


    And this point is barely being made? That it’s the clubs fault they haven’t got automated offside.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,117 ✭✭✭jacool


    That was a very expensive night for Spurs

    James Maddison – ankle knock (seriousness?)

    Micky van de Ven – hamstring (out for a while)

    Romero – 3 match ban

    Udogie – 1 match ban

    Points - certainly 2 dropped against a very, very average Chelsea. As everyone else said above, they just had to sit in and absorb it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,363 ✭✭✭✭SlickRic


    love Ange.

    but it's clear he will have a ceiling if that's his attitude to those kinds of games. the players were far too over-hyped, and once it settled down and Chelsea got a foothold (even a minor one), they just lost it with some of their challenges. they were really wound up for some reason. they need to learn to control things, rather than go on pure emotion.

    secondly, even Pep's teams sit in when they have to. you have to be sensible. if that is his attitude no matter what, then Spurs fans are going to adore him no doubt, and he may well get a trophy, and he may even get top 4 somehow. and that might be good enough. but the shine will ultimately wear off if he doesn't get cuter. his Celtic team was pilloried for similar tactics in Europe - that time will come for Spurs.

    but he is a breath of fresh air, his team plays extremely entertaining football and Spurs fans should be delighted with the feeling around the place.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭Fitz*


    To be fair, it could be a certain section of clubs that voted against it and that is the reason why it's not in.

    As far as I know, it's 14 clubs that have to agree to vote something in. so all it takes is 7 clubs to vote against it to stop it coming in.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 531 ✭✭✭Infoseeker1975


    Spurs have had a great start, their new manager has them playing in a totally different way, a big part of that is their new CB looks like an Olympic sprinter, a hamstring injury is the worst one possible for someone whose greatest strength is speed. Will be interesting to see what Spurs fans are saying at the end of the season about Ange, for now he is seen as incredible, hope they remember that come May if things turn out a little differently. What do they see as success given they only have the league and FA Cup to play in.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,798 ✭✭✭Ottoman_1000



    I don't understand why any club would vote against it. Is there a gain to be made that I'm missing here??



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,330 ✭✭✭Did you smash it


    It’s more expensive than the already paid for VAR checks. That could be the reason but I’m not sure. I’m think the athletic did an article on it but I didn’t read it at the time and their search function is garbage or I can’t use it properly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,516 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    It's weak sauce really, but supposedly they are waiting for a better system which is apparently in development. So they didn't want to spend money on a system which could be soon obsolete and need replacing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,720 ✭✭✭✭thebaz


    I liked Merson the player, admired/ identified with his alcohol struggles - but he is a shocking pundit, seams to have been given a bigger mouthpiece now that the great Soccer Satuday team of Jeff Steling has broken up, its actually now become quite dreadful



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 23,217 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kiith


    Majority of Spurs fans just wanted to see a change in how we play. We've gone through some of the worst football you'll see, and there was a huge amount of negativity in all aspects of the club. Conte did so much damage to the club, and left us in an absolute state.

    Its the reason why you see the celebrations you do at the end of random games. Players seem to actually be enjoying their jobs again, and the fans are loving it. Regardless of where we finish this year, i've enjoyed the last 11 games more than anything for the previous 5 seasons, so its already been a success imo.

    Obviously we want to see progress as well as vibes, but this season was always about rebuilding.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,144 ✭✭✭Augme


    I can see why Spurs fan love the style of play and at the moment they are on a completely freeroll given pre-season expectations so it must be great fun. It will be interesting to see if the team and fans still have the same principal towards the end of the season when the consequences of success, and more importantly, failure are much obvious.


    Similar enough if over the next few games they play a highline and lose then the gloss will likely be taken off.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,979 ✭✭✭doc_17


    Once again, your naked eye isn’t the standard. Calling offside doesn’t really take that long. It’s usually a secondary issue that causes an extra delay.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,496 ✭✭✭✭Mushy


    In this case it was checking who actually got the last touch



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,893 ✭✭✭TheRona


    I don't think the last touch matters, only whether the Spurs player got their head to it. Whether it was touched by a Chelsea player would have been classed as not deliberate. This makes it a quick, easy check.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,496 ✭✭✭✭Mushy


    Yeah but if Chelsea player was only one to touch it and mate crap of it, not a deflection. Although didn't look lke that scenario really but can be only explanation I'd give for it taking that long



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,798 ✭✭✭Ottoman_1000


    But in this incident, the Chelsea player was actively going for the ball, so if he did get to it, his touch would have been deemed intentional. Hence why they checked all angles to see if that was the case.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭IncognitoMan


    A good example of where a clean up of the rules would benefit the game long term.

    Instead of spending 3 minutes looking at did the Spurs player touch the ball the question should be did the Spurs player take part in that attack - yes or no.

    If yes then offside.

    A quick 5 second check. No drama. No trying to find if it flicked a hair on a players head etc..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 46,371 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    No, if he had just nodded it on in the ame way the spurs player did it would not have been deemed a controlled action. A deliberate action doesn't mean they intentionally went for it, its basically that the ball went where (reasonably) they were deliberately attempting for.

    It is an INSANE rule, highly subjective and an absolute mess.

    This phases of play stuff is a mess. A defender trying to clear a ball away from an offside player and that player then becoming onside as a result is just insanity.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,893 ✭✭✭TheRona


    My understanding is that it really has to be a chance to control the ball and gain possession, so anything in the air isn't going to be deemed deliberate. It would have to be some kind of ball along the ground that a player tries to intercept and has a decent chance of controlling.

    With the current rules, I don't think there's any way a Chelsea player touching it would have changed the ruling. If a Spurs player headed it, then it was offside.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭Fitz*


    PL clubs have a vote upcoming again. Again, they'll need 14 clubs to agree to this, to pass the motion (> 66% of votes).

    The potential Ruben Neves transfer was heavily rumoured at the time and now with Tonali's ban, it just might have been explored more.

    Because Chelsea, Man City, Brighton and Newcastle all currently operate under the multi-club ownership model or have strong links to one, I would guess that these will all vote against this motion passing.


    Edit: there is some potentially other clubs that may have links to other clubs through the same ownership such as Man Utd/Nice and Bournemouth/Lorient too. So that would be enough clubs to reject the motion and allow loans within multi-club ownership model. There would be more but I'm not aware of them.


    Post edited by Fitz* on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,979 ✭✭✭doc_17


    Not PL related but VAR related. Utd get a penalty tonight for an handball and the exact same thing happened in a game at the weekend and no penalty. I don’t think either of them are penalties, but that’s the issue with VAR, the officials aren’t consistent.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,103 ✭✭✭✭Fitz*


    After what happened last Sunday, a few Luton fans have started to donate to the Hillsborough Transformational Recovery Model. Fair play to them.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,952 ✭✭✭✭Osmosis Jones


    That might be less about VAR and more on UEFA's interpretation of the hand ball rule, they seem to always give soft ones in Euro competition.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,798 Mod ✭✭✭✭artanevilla


    The company that owns Aston Villa also owns a significant stake in Vitoria in Portugal so I can't see this resolution passing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,979 ✭✭✭doc_17


    Yeah. But that in itself is also a problem - different interpretations.

    Anyway, saw the red as well last night and thought it was an extremely unlucky one to get.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,385 ✭✭✭✭Liam O


    They were hamstrung by the first one last night. You can't give one and say the other wasn't. In reality neither were handballs.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,979 ✭✭✭doc_17


    Looks like Maddison could be out until the New Year. That would be about 10 PL matches he’d miss if true.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,981 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    It'll be interesting to see how they do without him. He's been excellent.

    I'd love to see Brennan Johnson get a shot at his role. I think he'd be excellent, he's such a hard worker and has great vision and an eye for goal.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,409 ✭✭✭fergiesfolly


    Not really about the Premier League, but there's an interesting piece on BBC website( sorry, can't link) about Girona being top of La Liga. Girona area tiny club with nearly no top flight experience. But are 2 points clear at the top of La Liga after 10 games. And it's not as if Barcelona or Real are having bad starts.

    What's most interesting about Girona, is that their owned by Manchester City's parent company and are benefitting from loans and cheap deals as part of that group.

    This is where the City ownership model will start to erode the normal hierarchy of football clubs.

    No problem with smaller clubs building themselves to challenge for trophies, CL places etc ( ala Brentford, Brighton) but Citys paymasters are undermining the sport and will destroy it as a spectator sport.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,218 ✭✭✭POKERKING


    You make it sound like they loaned them KdB and Haaland on the cheap. All players there arent good enough/near ready to be even squad players for City. Most are actually rejected players who city have ensured have a future in the game.


    Its a great achievement by Girona to top the league on their budget and squad. They lost two of their best players(Romeo to barca and Taty to Lazio) and its a good few of the squad that were very fortunate to get promoted two seasons ago.


    It wont last though so no need to get your nickers in a twist!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,038 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    I think the thing people would be more concerned about is the bigger picture - that football could become like baseball in the US, where every small team in lower leagues is just a subsidiary of a Major League team... no small teams can exist as their own thing anymore. Would be a shame for the same thing to happen in football, for all these small teams to lose their autonomy and just become functions of larger teams parking players, getting players gametime, or casting off rejects. Definitely something that's becoming more and more prevalent, at an ever increasing rate.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,409 ✭✭✭fergiesfolly


    But what if they loan them KDB when he gets down to his last few months of his contract. Or outbid a Premier League team for an up and coming talent and loan him to Girona for a year or two.

    Is that fair?


    Also, knickers. Not nickers.

    It's a little thing. It'll go unnoticed by some.

    But then, that's also what City are hoping for. Little things going unnoticed.

    And as long as they've got fans as pliable as you, they'll get away with it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,644 ✭✭✭theoneeyedman


    Absolutely.

    All about control. If the City group own the players, then they can control how and where they play. If a good player is owned by say Brentford, he can develop there and may give City a bloody nose in the EPL once or twice, but if he's in Girona then he won't - he'll be out of sight and they can control how and where he plays.

    All about control.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,175 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    Dunno how this is only being highlighted now. The Pozzo's have been doing it for years mainly between Udinese and Watford but sometimes Granada got tied into things.

    Its not new to City at all.



  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement