Is football no longer a "mans game"

homerjay2005

first off, this is not a thread to start accusing players of being divers or a cheat, so please please lets not turn this into a nani v suarez debate please. i would ask the mods to step in, if this becomes the case, this is not my intention so please respect this. i am talking here about the reaction of players, fans, pundits and refs alike in general.

so anyway, this thread is inspired by yesterdays chelsea game v qpr, but this is something ive had the opinion for a while, football is not longer a mans game. gone are the days of honesty in players, crunching tackles, players getting up and walking away from tackles. fans now are looking for every single decision to be given fouls and i believe this has now got to epic-ally worryingly proportions. football is becoming a non contact sport.

i hate chelsea, i think they get their fair share of reffing decisions, but yesterdays first half was a joke. and this is just one game, the freshest in my mind.

the penalty was a joke, Luiz barely touched the QPR player and he just took to the floor.

the red card on boswinga was a farce, it was a foul but only just, but not a red. he grabbed his shorts and down went SWP. must be amazing strength in the material if a mans short are pulled strong enough to bring him down, yet the shorts stay in the same position.

the red on drogba the same, it was a yellow at most. but for some reason, the amount of reds coming into the game for this, has grown over the past 3 years. have challenges got worse? no f*cking way. its a shift in attitude of all involved with the game and whats acceptable and not.

the sad thing for me is that lee dixon on MOTD2 said all 3 decisions were correct. has the football world really come to this? pundits massively influence the mindset of people and this then translates into the stands. even chelsea fans behind that goal in loftus road, shouted for 3 penalties and while all 3 were dubious, if fair play and consistency were shown by the ref, they should have had at least one.

the reality is, the ref got them 3 calls right, but the 3 calls in the first half wrong. BUT, he showed no consistency for incidents that were pretty much similar and that is another huge problem, there is no consistency in the rules. bad decisions by refs are leading to more bad decisions as players then start believing they should get these sort of fouls. chelsea players will go down that bit easier in a follow up game i am sure, it even happened in the second half already yesterday. and it will happen to every team. likewise the next time a united forward will be through on goal and has his arm held, he will be entitled to just fall over and so on and so on. its sad that this is now accepted in football and everybody cant man up and just get on with the game.

is this " he went in with 2 feet" argument valid of a pile of crap? is it officially written in the rule book? we hear pundits saying, he went over the ball. again, is it another overused cliche?

jamie carragher deserves great credit for last weekend when he totally ignored a rash 2 footed challenge from welbeck, if we had more players like carragher, football would be a better place, but sadly there is not. you would rarely see the likes of him, scholes, giggs and all the other players in the mid 30's bracket trying to con players, they are of a dying breed though.

and the sad aspect is, that while ive not seen the challenge on long, i believe that was a shocking tackle that went unpunished, so again, where is the consistency. yet all villa management can talk about is the "soft" red they did get.

i was at the united v city game and ive become disillusioned with the amount of soft frees that have come into the game. im sure that thread has debated everything, so i wont go any further. im actually considering stopping going to games due to the lack of proper honesty and above all else officiating in games.

has the beautiful game now become a game where every tackle is a potential card and a foul? and is football gone so pc, that the laws of the game as it was over 100 years ago, are now virtually dead?

thoughts please? football is trending in a very bad direction.

Jax Teller

Drogba was a red card all day imo .

keano_afc

Drogba's was definitely a red, dangerous over the top challenge.

Football has been like this for years though, and its only getting worse. The face that there is zero respect for the ref plays into it too. Until they start bringing in long bans for diving/simulation nothing will change.

Melion

The main thing that annoys me is people challenging the goalkeepers. If a hair on their precious little heads gets touched its automatically a free kick. It has to be one of the most annoying things about football for me.

Mitch Connor

Been saying the same for ages - I keep trying to justify football being called a 'contact sport', but it really doesn't seem that way anymore. Any contact seems to be a free kick, any free kick seems like it can result in a card.

I was really annoyed at the Charlie Adam incident last week in the United vs Liverpool game. There was contact, very very very minimal contact, but down went Adam. When reviewing the incident Gary Neville said that there was contact so Adam had every right to go down... WTF? It is a horrid indictment of the game, imo, when the 'contact' Ferdinand made gives the attacking player 'every right' to go to ground. Also, before any thinks this is just a liverpool vs united thing I am trying to bring up, it is not - I was more annoyed at Neville for his condoning of it, and I admit United players 'go down easy' just as much as any other player around.

Melion

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Been saying the same for ages - I keep trying to justify football being called a 'contact sport', but it really doesn't seem that way anymore. Any contact seems to be a free kick, any free kick seems like it can result in a card.

I was really annoyed at the Charlie Adam incident last week in the United vs Liverpool game. There was contact, very very very minimal contact, but down went Adam. When reviewing the incident Gary Neville said that there was contact so Adam had every right to go down... WTF? It is a horrid indictment of the game, imo, when the 'contact' Ferdinand made gives the attacking player 'every right' to go to ground. Also, before any thinks this is just a liverpool vs united thing I am trying to bring up, it is not - I was more annoyed at Neville for his condoning of it, and I admit United players 'go down easy' just as much as any other player around.

That may have come back to bite Adam in the arse though. He was definitely fouled in the build-up to the Norwich goal on Saturday

Turtyturd

Melion wrote: »

That may have come back to bite Adam in the arse though. He was definitely fouled in the build-up to the Norwich goal on Saturday

Same goes for Suarez, he was man handled at times on Saturday but all the comments in recent weeks seemed to play a part in the Refs decisions.

karma_

Both the Chelsea reds were good decisions, and that was also a definite penalty. I will say however, that the ref denied Chelsea a perfectly stonewall penalty in the 2nd half.

Also, this morning you posted that you thought Micah was lucky to not get a red for persistent fouling yesterday, which contradicts what you're saying here.

Mitch Connor

keano_afc wrote: »

Drogba's was definitely a red, dangerous over the top challenge.

Football has been like this for years though, and its only getting worse. The face that there is zero respect for the ref plays into it too. Until they start bringing in long bans for diving/simulation nothing will change.

There is little respect for officials because, imo, they do little to deserve it. Far too often their calls are poor and costly. I remember looking back at a United vs Chelsea game at SB, with Atkinson reffing I think, and counting 7 or 9 major decisions that the officials got wrong, that cost United - 3 in/leading to the goal Chelsea won by.

They make terrible calls fa too often, and then hide behind they union to avoid all criticism. Fergie said a ref wasn't fit enough to keep up with play, and got fined/banned for it. Look at the goal United got vs Spurs (Nani goal). No explannation of exactly what the ref thought he was doing, same for the Mendes 'goal' - no appology. What exacly did Herd get sent off for in the Villa game at the weekend?

ShiverinEskimo

I think you have to take into context some of the high-profile horror tackles over the last few years that have resulted in horror injuries.

For every Rio 'tackle' on Adam, you have Lee Cattermole inflicting common assault on a weekly basis.

I agree with you Ed in that I'd prefer more consistency than a relaxation of ref's attitudes towards contact. If you impede the player, you impede the player - it's free flowing football that people want, not rugby.

Melion

Mitch Connor wrote: »

What exacly did Herd get sent off for in the Villa game at the weekend?

It was the assistant who flagged for that though. Shocking decision.

Mitch Connor

Melion wrote: »

It was the assistant who flagged for that though. Shocking decision.

And it wa the ref who sent him off. Regardless of who signaled, there has been no public explanation given. I know that is because their union won't allow it (some refs want it, some don't) but to me it is part of the problem. The officials set themselves a part as if they are infallible, as if they should never be questioned - it is a farce.

ShiverinEskimo

There's another easy way to fix the fury over incorrect reffing decisions - ban slow motion replays.

People don't give enough gravity to the fact that ref's have one view, in real time, in the heat of the moment. It's a thankless job. And that's before the abuse.

Jax Teller

Look at Huttons tackle on long . Was a foul even called for that ?

mike65

The OP has something in general terms however when specific example are cited it shows just how difficult the game is to ref fairly while letting "men be men" Boswinga interfered with an attacking player having been outpaced, he fouled the player, he was the last man. The referee was correct, it may seem harsh but it was not wrong.

Drogbas two footer is exactly the sort of thing the authorities are rightly trying to remove from the game. Any time a player goes in like that broken bones are risked, we saw another example against Shane Long on Saturday. Everyone knows the rules and that such challenges will not go unpunished 90% of the time.

There is nothing heroic about such play - its not a manly thing to do.

As for referee consistency - that's get nothing to do with the topic.

Now there are other areas where clearly players behave like a bunch of wussies - simulation, diving, waving pretend cards about, gloves in October. Sadly this is going to be hard to deal with as society is generally now based on exploitation of any given moment, failure to take responsibility for ones actions and a something for nothing mentality.

homerjay2005

lads, please dont let this go into a united v liverpool debate.

anyway, i dont know if its a good route to go down on, but on the serious challenges aspect, should actual injuries be used as a barometer of red cards? how do you measure and control it? impossible really, also basing decisions on intent is another dodgy road. i do not believe that drogba intended to hurt the QPR player yesterday. i do not believe that Evans intended to bring down balotelli and so on and so on.

the dangerous tackles are red cards, there is no question about that, that is not the issue here. its the amount of cards that are coming, that probably would not have been cards a few years ago.

balotelli getting a yellow yesterday was a joke. likewise, when vidic got the late equaliser last year v villa, people were saying he should have been sent off for over celebrating.

they are just 2 examples of the amount of bulls*it that is now part of football.

i am also a believer that tv replays can sway decisions of fans completely, when some incidents are slowed down, they can totally change the perspective of what actually happened in the live action.

TheTownie

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

There's another easy way to fix the fury over incorrect reffing decisions - ban slow motion replays.

People don't give enough gravity to the fact that ref's have one view, in real time, in the heat of the moment. It's a thankless job. And that's before the abuse.

Must be a Platini fan! :P

quarryman

the red card on boswinga was a farce, it was a foul but only just, but not a red. he grabbed his shorts and down went SWP. must be amazing strength in the material if a mans short are pulled strong enough to bring him down, yet the shorts stay in the same position.

Agreed. SWP actually tried to play on and must have felt it was 50/50.

the red on drogba the same, it was a yellow at most. but for some reason, the amount of reds coming into the game for this, has grown over the past 3 years. have challenges got worse? no f*cking way. its a shift in attitude of all involved with the game and whats acceptable and not.

This was a red for me. 2-footed and dangerous.

There are definitely some players ruining the game regarding diving though. Rooney made a shocking one yesterday and Suarez seems to be getting worse (if that's possible) - disgrace.

It's part and parcel of the game, unfortunantely.

It's goes on in every game though and every club has their fair share of players that go down easily despite what you read...

homerjay2005

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

For every Rio 'tackle' on Adam, you have Lee Cattermole inflicting common assault on a weekly basis.

ah come on now, you see about 10 soft frees given in every game. you see very few shocking challenges.

the difference last week was it took place 19 yards out and led to a goal.

Mitch Connor

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

There's another easy way to fix the fury over incorrect reffing decisions - ban slow motion replays.

People don't give enough gravity to the fact that ref's have one view, in real time, in the heat of the moment. It's a thankless job. And that's before the abuse.

Banning slow mo replays doesn't make a call any better. It just makes everyone a bit more ignorant.

Anyway, poor reffing is a bit off the point, the point is that these 'slight contact' moments are considered to be a foul at all, and that players seemingly have 'every right' to go down at the slightest bit of contact/encouragement.

Good examples from yesterday.

Young and Rooney took two yesterday and no yellow. Rooneys was right in front of the ref too in the penalty area. As the ref said no foul, he should give a yellow straight away.

Consistancy with refereeing is a big problem.

homerjay2005

rarnes1 wrote: »

It's part and parcel of the game, unfortunantely.

It's goes on in every game though and every club has their fair share of players that go down easily despite what you read...

its not just about players going down easy. its about what football has become. silly laws, silly expectations of players, silly decisions. football is becoming a non contact sport and is becoming too PC. a player does this - yellow card. another player does that, red card. take your shirt off or hold hands with a players, send him off. but almost break his ankle, sure a yellow is grand.

just cos its now part and parcel of the game, doesnt mean its right or has to be accepted.

i certainly dont recall football being anywhere like this 5-10 years ago when i first started watching football.

stampydmonkey

Been thinking this more and more recently. As another poster said...I also have to convince myself that football is actually a contact sport. The amount of soft free kicks is disgusting to see, as is the total lack of appreciation of what is actually happening when someone is making a tackle/or diving. Its fairly obvious to cop when someone is going for the ball and when someone is going for the man. I cant remember the last time I saw a defender sliding around a winger and hooking the ball off him cleanly without the winger taking off into the air whether there was contact or not. I don't get the "intention was there" nonsense either. I intend to score a cracker in every game I play...never happens.

As for the goalkeepers being saintly objects that cannot be touched...get out of it, most keepers and 6ft plus and bigger than anyone around them...why the hell cant they be ruffed up a bit (provided its fair and within the rules)?

Honestly think a lot of the poor decisions comes down to the referees having not played the game to a certain level. You can watch all the football in the world but unless you go out, get tackled, tackle, argue, win and lose...how the hell do you expect to understand what's going through the minds of the 22 players you are trying to control. The linesmen have to man up (for the want of a better word) too, they could learn alot from the rugby refs.

homerjay2005

rarnes1 wrote: »

Good examples from yesterday.

Young and Rooney took two yesterday and no yellow. Rooneys was right in front of the ref too in the penalty area. As the ref said no foul, he should give a yellow straight away.

Consistancy with refereeing is a big problem.

there was many dives in that game yesterday, not just them too.

but again, i could say why is a player falling over, now becoming a so serious, that its a yellow? does he not look like a twat already, besides getting booked for it?

id rather get a yellow for taking somebody out of the game, than for taking my shirt off celebrating or falling over.

Mitch Connor

rarnes1 wrote: »

Good examples from yesterday.

Young and Rooney took two yesterday and no yellow. Rooneys was right in front of the ref too in the penalty area. As the ref said no foul, he should give a yellow straight away.

Consistancy with refereeing is a big problem.

Which Rooney one? The Kompany tackle? If so, I disagree with you. It wasn't a foul, it wasn't a dive.

TheTownie

homerjay2005 wrote: »

there was many dives in that game yesterday, not just them too.

but again, i could say why is a player falling over, now becoming a so serious, that its a yellow? does he not look like a twat already, besides getting booked for it?

id rather get a yellow for taking somebody out of the game, than for taking my shirt off celebrating or falling over.

If looking like a twat was enough to act as a deterrent then I would agree but unfortunately its not and a player will continue to repeat the action until he gets the decision in his favour which inevitable he will at some point.

For that reason I am in favour of ref action to deter repeat offending.

Paparazzo

Was watching the chelsea game on MOTD2 last night, they said it was a definite peno. Luiz touches yer man with his shoulder, and he obviously jumps on the ground. They never even mentioned that it was a dive.
Then Luiz does something similar later on, hands on him and he jumps in the air and the MOTD lads laugh at his theatratics.
Defo not a peno imho. I agree with the OP, it's got to the stage where touching someone is going to be a free unless it's shoulder to shoulder. And even then, if someone falls (intentionally or not), it's a free.

SlickRic

homerjay2005 wrote: »

i do not believe that Evans intended to bring down balotelli and so on and so on.

he intended to impede him though.

and this is where another part of the problem lies.

one reason players have been told to go down easier, is because rarely do you get a free or a penalty if you get impeded unfairly in a way that doesn't bring you down.

so moving on from that...while Bosingwa's was harsh, it wasn't totally wrong, as he clearly impeded SWP. however, a yellow should really have sufficed.

Luiz's was a foul every day of the week, it was a nudge in the back. it put the attacker off balance in an unfair way. it was a foul. the dive was exaggerated, but he wouldn't have got the decision (a correct decision) if he hadn't gone down. it looks awful, but sometimes it's the only way to get the right decision in your favour.

now, obviously people take it to the extremes, and that's where it gets horrendous. for example, Downing getting hit by a sniper, or Young falling into Lucas last week. that is what needs to stop.

making sure you get a free kick for what you deserve doesn't mean you're not a man, just like going in with two feet or doing what Hutton did doesn't make you a man. modern football culture has developed in such a way that going down when in any way impeded is the norm, because you won't get your free otherwise. unfortunately, some players take advantage, dive outright, and that's what makes a referee's task so difficult.

also, the rolling around when nothing's wrong is obviously one that should be stamped out and helps nobody. that should be met with bookings even if they were fouled tbh.

helimachoptor

Drogbas was defintely a red ed, would have given the other red or the pens

TheTownie

SlickRic wrote: »

he intended to impede him though.

and this is where another part of the problem lies.

one reason players have been told to go down easier, is because rarely do you get a free or a penalty if you get impeded unfairly in a way that doesn't bring you down.

so moving on from that...while Bosingwa's was harsh, it wasn't totally wrong, as he clearly impeded SWP. however, a yellow should really have sufficed.

Luiz's was a foul every day of the week, it was a nudge in the back. it put the attacker off balance in an unfair way. it was a foul. the dive was exaggerated, but he wouldn't have got the decision (a correct decision) if he hadn't gone down. it looks awful, but sometimes it's the only way to get the right decision in your favour.

now, obviously people take it to the extremes, and that's where it gets horrendous. for example, Downing getting hit by a sniper, or Young falling into Lucas last week. that is what needs to stop.

making sure you get a free kick for what you deserve doesn't mean you're not a man, just like going in with two feet or doing what Hutton did doesn't make you a man. modern football culture has developed in such a way that going down when in any way impeded is the norm, because you won't get your free otherwise. unfortunately, some players take advantage, dive outright, and that's what makes a referee's task so difficult.

also, the rolling around when nothing's wrong is obviously one that should be stamped out and helps nobody. that should be met with bookings even if they were fouled tbh.

Thats where all the trouble stems from. The day it became acceptable to 'highlight' a foul to ensure the ref was aware of it is the day all the unsavoury behaviour became possible.

Rather than solving the problem of refs missing fouls the authorities started a process of bending the rules to suit the culture of 'highlighting' fouls.

Orizio

Soccer has been like this for years upon years, its the primary reason I stopped watching it.

At the same time, all sports are being pussified, the only exception being Rugby imo.

Spud83

Orizio wrote: »

Soccer has been like this for years upon years, its the primary reason I stopped watching it.

At the same time, all sports are being pussified, the only exception being Rugby imo.

Even then there are huge complaints about the referring of the final yesterday.

GavRedKing

Chelsea fan, it was a penalty, he got pushed in the back, albit not by much force but ya cant do it, if its outside the box its a free.

Drogba was a red, he lost the ball and lost the plot, went in with studs showing and caught Taarabt.

Bosingwa was never a red.

G.K.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

They make terrible calls fa too often, and then hide behind they union to avoid all criticism. Fergie said a ref wasn't fit enough to keep up with play, and got fined/banned for it. Look at the goal United got vs Spurs (Nani goal). No explannation of exactly what the ref thought he was doing, same for the Mendes 'goal' - no appology. What exacly did Herd get sent off for in the Villa game at the weekend?

tbh that one was fair, stats emerged after the game showing that Wiley had run quite a lot further in the game than quite a few Utd players did.

Benimar

If you want conclusive proof that football is a non-contact sport just look at the Marseille V Arsenal game during the week.

Johan Djourou put a perfect sliding tackle in on a Marseille player, winning the ball cleanly with his foot on the ground. Not only was a free awarded against Djourou, but he was booked as well!

cson

I think by the letter of the law the Bosingwa red was correct, I think SWP had him done for pace and Terry wasn't going to get there.

cson

Benimar wrote: »

If you want conclusive proof that football is a non-contact sport just look at the Marseille V Arsenal game during the week.

Johan Djourou put a perfect sliding tackle in on a Marseille player, winning the ball cleanly with his foot on the ground. Not only was a free awarded against Djourou, but he was booked as well!

Yet if you saw the amount of holding and interfering that was going on in the box come corner time for Arsenal you'd think that the same rules for WWE are good for the penalty area.

Interestingly, Dean Whitehead put in 2 very robust tackles against Arteta yesterday and he never batted an eyelid to them. I guess its different strokes for different players.

An awful lot of players look for fouls - Walcott, Rooney, Downing etc seem to play for contact a lot of the time imo.

Edit: Just as an aside, thought the ref had a good game in letting things flow from both sides in Arsenal - Stoke yesterday - there was a good few incidents of what I'm talking about above in 'looking' for a foul but the ref just told them to get up.

gosplan

There's still plenty of room for 'men' in the game, but they have to be able to play football and time tackles. Vidic, Terry, Kompany all fine but sh1tkickers need not apply.

It's always been the case that a shoulder to shoulder shove was OK and it still is.

Luiz was an idiot yesterday. It's got nothing to do with whether it's 'a man's' game or not, he made a silly tackle in the box. Pushed a guy in the back and was never going to achieve anything bar possibly give away a penalty, which is what he did.

The Bos red was not for the nature of the foul but because Terry wasn't getting back to deny SWP a goalscoring opportunity.

I get you point but I feel all those examples aren't really good ones. As someone mentioned, any tackle with a decnt amount of agression and committment is getting a yellow/red these days. That's much more of a problem IMO.

PARlance

homerjay2005 wrote: »

should actual injuries be used as a barometer of red cards? how do you measure and control it? impossible really, also basing decisions on intent is another dodgy road. i do not believe that drogba intended to hurt the QPR player yesterday. i do not believe that Evans intended to bring down balotelli and so on and so on.

the dangerous tackles are red cards, there is no question about that, that is not the issue here. its the amount of cards that are coming, that probably would not have been cards a few years ago.

balotelli getting a yellow yesterday was a joke. likewise, when vidic got the late equaliser last year v villa, people were saying he should have been sent off for over celebrating.

they are just 2 examples of the amount of bulls*it that is now part of football.

Intent doesn't really come into it in my book(near impossible to prove).
Basing it on injuries is daft as well (pretty sure that was rhetorical question though).

It all boils down to dangerous tackles in my eyes, every lad that has played any degree of football knows what a dangerous tackle is.
Going in 2 footed is a dangerous, going in late with studs showing is dangerous, going under someone that is mid air is dangerous(not to be confused with opponent climbing over you and then falling).
All of those have the ability to cause serious injury.
· 2 footed; you're pretty sure you're getting red
· late with studs; you're on a tightrope, 50/50 that you'll make tackle in the first place, then if you don't make it, its 50/50 that you'll get sent off
· challenging someone while mid air is rare enough, if you've got your feet planted and opponent is in the air, and you cause the player to go off balance, then you're pretty sure of a yellow with a lesser chance of a red.
I think all players taken the field know this, and there's no excuse for professionals not to know it (or lads out on a sunday in the park either), or to have grievances after doing so.

Taking Drogba's tackle for example (any number could have been used to highlight this). He went in two with two feet of the ground, with this, he lost all ability to control the outcome. The fact that a serious injury didn't occur (or doesn't in these instances) is purely down to the person being tackled, and in particular, their ability/inability to move out of the way etc.

I don't think any of the above enters the "Man's Game" debate. No man should want to see a team-mate, opponent, or any other player being taken of the pitch with a serious injury.


I think the highlighting of Balotellis yellow yesterday contradicts your argument because I don't think it's very manly to go lifting up your shirt to celebrate a goal.
I have no problem with this rule at all, again, players know they will be booked if they do so... So, don't do it if you don't want a card
(Referring inconsistencies are a different argument altogether, I'm basing this all on the likelihood that cards etc should be given)

The main issues I have with the game at present all boils down to the players. Ref's will get decisions wrong, just like the pro's make bad decisions/judgments during a game.

My main gripes with the game that fall into the "Mans Game" debate are the following.

· Players reactions to decisions, get on with the game and less of the prancing around looking to get someone booked or in the case of an incorrect decision, have your b*tch about it and leave it there.
· Players over-acting injuries, all too common now. A guy rolling around holding his ankle when it's never been touched etc. I'd be in favour of reviewing video evidence to stamp this out for good. Not to be confused with a player going down without actually being touched (I think players are wrongly accused of diving when their speed/direction of run is stopped by an outstretched leg etc...the player jumps over to avoid but goes off balance. There is no contact in this instance, but it can be a perfectly valid free. A lot of fans seem to think there needs to be contact)
· Keepers should not be given frees when someone farts in their vicinity.

To finish up, I'd be quite happy to see those 3 points eradicated from the game and most other things are fine as they stand.

Mr Alan

SlickRic wrote: »

also, the rolling around when nothing's wrong is obviously one that should be stamped out and helps nobody.

In fairness, if there is contact & the player "roles around" somewhat, except in extreme cases, it's near impossible to tell if it's genuine as their pain can't be measured.

Often I've seen quite tame tackles result in players flapping about & thought "****s sake-get on with it"-only for a super slow mo replay to show that they jarred their ankle or knee in a nasty way which would be sore as ****. There was a case of that with Phil Jones recently enough (yesterday I think actually!)

Mitch Connor

G.K. wrote: »

tbh that one was fair, stats emerged after the game showing that Wiley had run quite a lot further in the game than quite a few Utd players did.

That is not relevant. What matters is where he is in comparison to the play - not how far he has ran.

SlickRic

of course we don't know Al.

my only point is the rolling around when it is nothing (the players knows!), is what doesn't help.

the referees have an impossible task, and in that instance, really need a player to help them out; as Carragher did for Welbeck as was pointed out in the OP.

Dotrel

It'll only be a mans game when players stop trying to intimidate referees.

The_Kew_Tour

Is it just me, but there Refs always blow for free now when players go shoulder to shoulder and whoever goes down gets free.

That annoys me.

Kiwi_knock

Two footed sliding tackles should always be a red card offense because the danger they pose to the receiving player. I think it is impossible to categorise these types of tackles into ones that cause injury and ones that do not cause injury. Intention and the severity of the injury should not come into the equation of whether a referee should award a red card or not.

Taking an example from the recent Welsh rugby match where the Welsh captain was sent off for a dangerous tackle. The tackle was not intentional and it does not cause any lasting injury, however within the rules of the game it was a reckless and dangerous tackle and was a deserved red card. I view two footed challenges in the same manner, as being both dangerous and reckless and deserving of a red card.

homerjay2005

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Is it just me, but there Refs always blow for free now when players go shoulder to shoulder and whoever goes down gets free.

That annoys me.

thats a huge portion of what i am talking about. i think the sky sports generation is a real root of the problem, everything is magnified and once one person says it was a foul, everybody else then expects a foul to be give and refs get put under huge pressure.

did AVB get a warning for his comments yesterday? i hope he doesnt as people should be able to say what they want to an extent, but going off previous bannings, he could get a ban. which would be wrong.

the fa have gone down very dangerous roads with some of their crazy decisions and appointments and i think the game is in a very poor state right now due to discpline. has the "respect" campaign turned refs into people who are just there to blow the whistle every time something happens?

UglyBolloxFace

homerjay2005 wrote: »

the red on drogba the same, it was a yellow at most.

Are you serious?

That was a definite and fully-deserved red card. He went in to cause damage as you could see the frustration building in him because of how the match was playing out for Chelsea.

Shanotheslayer

People saying Drogba's wasn't a red card I think they don't know anything about football.

Drogba dived in 2 feet studs up off the ground? Absolute Leg Breaker if that catches the opposition. Red all day long.

ItsAWindUp

Drogba's was a clear red, f ucking stupid tackle from him. As I said in the match thread, it's a damn shame that Sturridge had been taken off minutes before that, no way would you have seen him do something like that. Bosingwa's sending off was absolute stupidity in all fairness, very little in it. I recieved an infraction for airing my thoughts about the referee Chris Foy yesterday so I won't get into that. But how that man is a Premier League is absolutely beyond me. The mind boggles, it really does.

homerjay2005

i dont think the issues are all down to the refs, the are abiding by stupid rules and sometimes being conned by players. fans are basing opinions on a good few things - pundits, replays from every angle, previous incidents, players appealing etc etc.

howard webb was lashed for his performance in the world cup final. he got one decisions wrong, the players acted like thugs but typically pundits and fans blamed him.

the refs are clowns sometimes, but they are not the only problem.

its a vicious circle.

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

People saying Drogba's wasn't a red card I think they don't know anything about football.

lol,there is always one who comes out with this "you dont know anything about football lark". talk about patronizing.

ive been playing football for 20 years and some of that at a very decent level when i was younger. as a defender and somebody who hopes to be a ref in the next 2 or 3 years, i think you need to respect that people are entitled to opinion with resorting to that crap. i dont think drogba went in to injure anybody and this is the type of attitude that sums up the reason why i believe football is going to s*it.

the game is going too soft.