Jump to content

Motherwell (H)


skygod

Recommended Posts

Well thrashing the sheep looks out of place in their recent form, maybe the trip to Israel told on them.
That said, the old firm have so many options available to them that this kind of result against all the rest of the teams will sadly not be uncommon this season.

Hope they have another defensive nightmare against us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Guff92 said:

Now we have a settled starting 11 I can’t see anything other than a top 6 finish.

We don’t have a settled starting 11 though. We still have to see what Dyer does with the keeper position when Eastwood is fully fit. Then there is how we accommodate Mulumbu. Then there is do we go 4-4-2 and put Brophy back in or stay 4-3-3. That’s before we consider that the two players who we presumed were going to be starting fullbacks are still on the bench as is one of our most consistent players of the last few seasons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Guff92 said:

The overall standard of the league this season is shocking. Not been impressed by any of the teams we have played so far. Even the old firm looked “meh” compared to previous seasons. 
 

Now we have a settled starting 11 I can’t see anything other than a top 6 finish.

Completely agree. Although tbf to Gers, they definitely look a good step above everyone.

Edited by KTIDanny85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Waht is the opinion on the latest "handball in the box" interpretation? I am concerned with the direction of ravel here towards "if it hits anybody's arm but the goalie anywhere in the box it is a penalty".

IMO we are heading for a situation where strikers are going to start aiming for defenders arms rather than the goal. Unless there is clear intent it should not be a spot kick IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

Waht is the opinion on the latest "handball in the box" interpretation? I am concerned with the direction of ravel here towards "if it hits anybody's arm but the goalie anywhere in the box it is a penalty".

IMO we are heading for a situation where strikers are going to start aiming for defenders arms rather than the goal. Unless there is clear intent it should not be a spot kick IMO. 

Might not be the seen as much in our league as much as is no VAR like the mess that EPFL has been in first few weeks of this new rule and VAR checks in slow motion etc...... other leagues in Europe seem to so far coped better with use of VAR than down south has

though the issue up here is that still left down to the individual referee’s opinion in a split second of that new rule 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

Waht is the opinion on the latest "handball in the box" interpretation? I am concerned with the direction of ravel here towards "if it hits anybody's arm but the goalie anywhere in the box it is a penalty".

IMO we are heading for a situation where strikers are going to start aiming for defenders arms rather than the goal. Unless there is clear intent it should not be a spot kick IMO. 

It’s an utter shambles. I’m still of the opinion VAR should be hunted. Maybe keep it for violent conduct or mistaken identity. Reading BBC match reports from around Europe this morning and it’s VAR making the headlines. Even with it there is still debate to whether it was the correct call or not. 

Edited by piffer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, piffer said:

It’s an utter shambles. I’m still of the opinion VAR should be hunted. Maybe keep it for violent conduct or mistaken identity. Reading BBC match reports from around Europe this morning and it’s VAR making the headlines. Even with it there is still debate to whether it was the correct call or not. 

Yup, VAR is not making things better. I saw a penalty geven against, I think it was Man U, then rulled out with a VAR review. It looked like a pen. in real time and I absolutely could not for the life of me see what had changed the ref's view. In the slo-mo from all the different angles it still looked like a stonewallwer to me. And spookily enough I found myself in agreement with Alan Shearer who said almost exactly the same on the TV later. He could not for the life of him see why the ref had changed his mind.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VAR is killing football as we know it...what was once a spontaneous game with lots of discussion points after the match...VAR has killed the spontaneity and it has resulted in some controversial interpretation of the rules by the Referees...

Goal line technology I am all for ...VAR...no

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, jock said:

VAR is killing football as we know it...what was once a spontaneous game with lots of discussion points after the match...VAR has killed the spontaneity and it has resulted in some controversial interpretation of the rules by the Referees...

Goal line technology I am all for ...VAR...no

VAR is fine, its the LAW which is an ass in these cases.  Handball should only be a penalty if Deliberate, or stops a goalbound effort where the hand is in an unnatural position.

But its not, literally any touch from the arm, is now seemingly being deemed foul play.  Amd unsurprisingly its the f**king EPL Refs who are making an absolutw dogs breakfast of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, piffer said:

It’s an utter shambles. I’m still of the opinion VAR should be hunted. Maybe keep it for violent conduct or mistaken identity. Reading BBC match reports from around Europe this morning and it’s VAR making the headlines. Even with it there is still debate to whether it was the correct call or not. 

The game has totally made a rod for its own back and has changed out of all recognition - imagine countries and hedge funds owing clubs! There is so much money at stake at the highest levels that those who can benefit or lose are not willing the potential fortunes to be influenced by the eyes of the match officials only. Share prices can surge or crash by virtue of a refereeing decision. The effect of mobile technology cannot be underestimated either. If you're at a English Premiership game and there is an offside - do you instantly check your phone to see endless slow motion replays from every conceivable angle or to see if the match odds have changed for any of the myriad betting options available? The eyes of the match officials have no chance against the enhanced scrutiny that they are now under and the vast sums of money that can be impacted by a single decision. There is huge pressure for more justice and consistency, VAR has been demanded by the money and the footballing powers have been only too happy to go along with it to keep the gravy train flowing

VAR hasn't done done much to eradicate the inconsistencies. It seems to have created as many as it has solved although that's probably the result of the rewriting of some of the rules as much as it's the fault of VAR directly. The early justification was that VAR would be used for incidents where there was clear and obvious error. That in itself is subjective as people can't agree on what's clear or obvious. If it helps get to the correct decision in any part of the game then in theory it should be used. Then it would just be start stop like American football, although maybe the broadcasters could use the time to get some more ads in.

I've never been in a ground where VAR was in use, but frankly I would rather enjoy the spontaneity of the moment and take the ref's decision right or wrong rather than waiting for a decision to come up on a screen. From the TV viewer's point of view, at least you are informed as to what's happening, but I just feel that it completely sterilises the game. Football is not a game that lends itself to consistency; similar incidents in different games, even similar incidents within the same game are never judged consistently. That's part and parcel of the human element of the game and part of what makes it special. It's probably too late to turn back the clock and VAR is here to stay - hope it never makes its way north of the border though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Beaker71 said:

VAR is fine, its the LAW which is an ass in these cases.  Handball should only be a penalty if Deliberate, or stops a goalbound effort where the hand is in an unnatural position.

But its not, literally any touch from the arm, is now seemingly being deemed foul play.  Amd unsurprisingly its the f**king EPL Refs who are making an absolutw dogs breakfast of it.

It was when the word "unnatural" was used first that a lot of the chaos started - what's unnatural? - is it when the hand / arm  is away from the body? (using your arm in a natural position for balance is seemingly different to a natural position for defending a ball coming at you) - is it when the silhouette is extended? - blah blah blah

I agree that the rewriting of the laws have caused a lot of the VAR issues. In doing this they have tried to make the instructions for the ref more precise, taking away their initiative - in reality it's just confused it even more.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, CYRILLRIP said:

It was when the word "unnatural" was used first that a lot of the chaos started - what's unnatural? - is it when the hand / arm  is away from the body? (using your arm in a natural position for balance is seemingly different to a natural position for defending a ball coming at you) - is it when the silhouette is extended? - blah blah blah

I agree that the rewriting of the laws have caused a lot of the VAR issues. In doing this they have tried to make the instructions for the ref more precise, taking away their initiative - in reality it's just confused it even more.

 

The clue is in the name ..."handball". There is no mention of natural or un-natural positions. IMO any position where the arm is connected to the body and no bones are broken is "natural".

"Handball" means quite simply using your hand or in this case any part of your arm up to your shoulder to play the ball. Just like football is using your foot or leg. That is actively using your hand in a concious way to direst the ball to gain an advantage. The ball being diven with force and at high speed against somebodys arm and spinning off in a completly random direction cannot IMO be seen as an advantage to the defender.

Not everybody will agree but that is how I see it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CYRILLRIP said:

It was when the word "unnatural" was used first that a lot of the chaos started - what's unnatural? - is it when the hand / arm  is away from the body? (using your arm in a natural position for balance is seemingly different to a natural position for defending a ball coming at you) - is it when the silhouette is extended? - blah blah blah

I agree that the rewriting of the laws have caused a lot of the VAR issues. In doing this they have tried to make the instructions for the ref more precise, taking away their initiative - in reality it's just confused it even more.

 

Clear and obvious is the bit that gets me. We’ve seen penalties given after ten replays in slow motions from different angles and still not 100% sure. How is that a clear and obvious error from the official. Same with offside. They magnify it slow it down. Work out the exact position right when the ball played and draw a digital line to work out that the player is 1mm offside with his middle finger on his left hand that he can’t score with anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...