Things In Football That Grind Your Gears

Paully D

That_Guy wrote: »

Managers complaining about fixture congestion. Just fúck off.

dan1895

That_Guy wrote: »

Managers complaining about fixture congestion. Just fúck off.

More annoying when the club have been on a tour of the states or Far East in order to sell shirts.

That_Guy

Pardew annoyed me greatly last season Paully. Hiding behind his crap tactics and blaming it on the Europa League.

Richard Hillman

YouTookMyName wrote: »

The sky and media love in for gareth bale.

Why? He's a great player, a match winner, a scorer of big and great goals. Whats not to love about him? He's brilliant to watch.

event

Kirby wrote: »

The one constant is that every team should be trying to win the game and that involves scoring goals. If they aren't atleast trying to do that, than they shouldn't get anything. That's the ethos behind the idea for 3 for a win, 1 for a score draw and 0 points for a scoreless draw.

but what if both teams do try and win the game, yet it ends up 0-0?
Tough shíte, you're getting nothing

Madworld

Short Corners. Can't stand them.

Richard Hillman

event wrote: »

but what if both teams do try and win the game, yet it ends up 0-0?
Tough shíte, you're getting nothing

I don't want to answer for the other poster but imo Yes, tough ****. It would make the last 10 minutes of games absolutely brilliant to watch.

Chancer3001

He said if they WEREN'T trying, then they get zero points.

So, if they WERE trying, they'd get the point

event

Chancer3001 wrote: »

He said if they WEREN'T trying, then they get zero points.

So, if they WERE trying, they'd get the point

so what, you'd have a panel reviewing games on a monday morning, giving out points to teams who tried?

Chancer3001

It's a stupid idea.

Richard Hillman

Chancer3001 wrote: »

It's a stupid idea.

Why? It would it would be brilliant seeing two teams going all out to score. It would also decrease the amount of rubbish games and promote attacking football.

I know football fans are an ultra conservative bunch but I can't think of any logical reasons of why it would be negative.

dreamers75

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Why? It would it would be brilliant seeing two teams going all out to score. It would also decrease the amount of rubbish games and promote attacking football.

I know football fans are an ultra conservative bunch but I can't think of any logical reasons of why it would be negative.

Because you might lose.

DyldeBrill

an anti climax of a free kick that is just ballooned over!

Andersonisgod

Madworld wrote: »

Short Corners. Can't stand them.

Ye, damn those teams for not tossing it rather aimlessly into the box in the hope that they might get lucky and score even though the opposition has an aerial advantage over them. I hate how those teams try the odd time to play to their strengths and get the ball on the ground, retain possession and get another attack starter again.

GTR63

Michael Owen's commentary

dan1895

This thread is starting to grind my gears.
No points for a draw indeed.

citytillidie

764dak wrote: »

There's still a flaw in 0-0 vs scoring draws. Normally in 0-0 draws at least one team goes out attacking. So I give two scenarios: 1. if one team defends with 11 and gets a 0-0; 2. if both played attacking and the match ends 2-2. In the first scenario, you would basically punish the team "that tried to play" football. It wouldn't be fair to that team. So it would be better to keep all draws equal instead of scoring draws.

The increase to 3 points for a win hasn't increased the number of goals.

Here's a 2005 study: http://www.garicano.com/index_files/GPH11.pdf

Since there are 3 points a game on offer and if its a draw a team get 1 point each for a draw, why not give that extra point to the team with more corners.

Iang87

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Ye, damn those teams for not tossing it rather aimlessly into the box in the hope that they might get lucky and score even though the opposition has an aerial advantage over them. I hate how those teams try the odd time to play to their strengths and get the ball on the ground, retain possession and get another attack starter again.

I assumed the poster meant short corner then whipping it in straight away

Kirby

dan1895 wrote: »

This thread is starting to grind my gears.
No points for a draw indeed.

Can't be grinding your gears too much. If you'd read it you would know that it's no points for a scoreless draw. Score draws still give out a point.

Andersonisgod

Iang87 wrote: »

I assumed the poster meant short corner then whipping it in straight away

Even then the idea is to improve the angle for the cross and to cause a bit of confusion among the opposition.

Iang87

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Even then the idea is to improve the angle for the cross and to cause a bit of confusion among the opposition.

also means a defender is closing you down and you bring offside into play

Nalz

rarnes1 wrote: »

Yeah, I've never heard any Irish fan sing with an English accent in all the time I've been following football.

Complete made up post above yours

No its not

Andersonisgod

Iang87 wrote: »

also means a defender is closing you down and you bring offside into play

For even the sheer sake of variety and unpredictability it's worth trying it a few times rather than doing the same thing every time.

Which is another thing, something that grinds my gears is when a team get a freekick relatively close to the goal but shoot every time. Surely once or twice it would be worth trying something clever that they've worked on in the training ground.

Or from freekicks near the half way line and, rather than getting the game started again quickly, the team elect to put it into the box.

EdenHazard

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

People who think a team good at defending is worth less than a team good at attacking.

People who see football as just "entertainment". The Sky Sports generation of immediate gratification, short attention spans and goals goals goals.

It is for entertainment. Its a sport, it doesn't need to exist, it exists purely as entertainment.

I hate when people try to make football out to be more important than it is.

Something about football, how in America, the working class there would see it as a lame sport, equivalent to cricket here.

dan1895

EdenHazard wrote: »

It is for entertainment. Its a sport, it doesn't need to exist, it exists purely as entertainment.

I hate when people try to make football out to be more important than it is.

Something about football, how in America, the working class there would see it as a lame sport, equivalent to cricket here.

Who gives a flying f*ck what the working class in America think?

Kirby

People who keep talking about "needing to get some bodies in". It's rampant on this forum in particular.

I understand the sentiment but it's still stupid. "Bodies" implies that anyone will do, regardless of how good they are. Who wants that? Surely you should be trying to sign good players to fill out your squad......"Oh we are light, anyone will do".

Besides, they are players, not corpses. You want some bodies? Take a trip to the morgue you psycho.

Dolph Starbeam

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25580824

This really grinds my gears. Its like a player is making fun of the fact that he is useless and can't score.

happydayz182

When managers talk about projects when it is obvious they will be gone in the next two years anyway---either by getting sacked of if a bigger club comes along!

Corholio

When players, who after giving away a free kick, pick up the ball and walk away with it before throwing it back. I think players who have a foul given against them should not be allowed touch the ball to try and waste time, and if so should be booked. Annoys the proverbials out of me.

Neeson

YayaBanana wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25580824

This really grinds my gears. Its like a player is making fun of the fact that he is useless and can't score.

Raised 35,000! (And trebled it)

That's some job for a group of lavishly paid young men.

And i'msure he got it trimmed a bit every few weeks so it wouldn't go completely out of control.