Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

General Premier League Thread 2022-23 - mod note in OP 12/03/23

1214215217219220344

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 258 ✭✭It is a Dunne Deal


    If they lose to forest it is curtains I'd say.

    Post edited by It is a Dunne Deal on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,357 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    I'll take your word for it, I didn't watch the world Cup but I had heard (perhaps incorrectly) that it was significantly better than what the 5th EPL official trots out every week.

    Save boards.ie by subscribing: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,266 ✭✭✭Garzorico


    How was the ‘challenge’ by Sabitzer not a red? VAR refs are a farce. Like I’ve spouted previously the game needs umpires on the pitch and/or closer collaboration with the VAR refs. Some of the calls are so wrong it’s unfair to the team on the (non) receiving end.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,526 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    The people doing VAR and your proposed umpires are the exact same refs who have been making wrong decisions for years that lead to VAR.

    It will come down to interpretation and human error no matter what

    Something that would help at least is a ref tax on Premier League players so the refs get payed a wage where they can be young fit fully trained professionals who can keep up with the players.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,266 ✭✭✭Garzorico


    That tackle was dangerous/reckless play. Red card every time. A joke of a decision from the officials.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,526 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Fair enough I thought it was a lot less. I was confused a bit by the fact they still have a "real job"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,266 ✭✭✭Garzorico


    In football the officials (ref/linesmen/VAR) are not perceived to be a team, the ref is all powerful throughout the whole game. They need to get to the same place as rugby/NFL where the refs are explaining decisions so as the fans hear and it takes the mystery/fan frustration out of the decision. I would love to hear the reasoning behind the decision not to send Sabitzer off other than ‘because’. It’s ridiculous at this stage and in the interests of fairness it’s only going to go one way and that’s multiple on field refs and capable VARs.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,526 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    A massively stupid thing in soccer is the idea people will riot if they see a replay. The lack of info available to match going fans is actually causing more agro than stopping.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 258 ✭✭It is a Dunne Deal


    It's a stonewall red card absolutely blatant Joao Felix was sent off for a similar one against Fulham where he pulled out of it to a degree but still made contact with studs up. Even worse the ref didn't even book sabitzer.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 258 ✭✭It is a Dunne Deal


    The lack of transparency is what drives me mad. They give explanations afterwards but for me they are pure arse covering exercises we need to hear the decision being made in real time. Why won't they let people hear it? If all is on the level then there is nothing to fear for them letting us hear it.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 13,430 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cookiemunster


    Except it wasn't a stone wall red. Here is the exact wording from the IFAB Laws of the Game, Law 12.

    Serious foul play.

    A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

    Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

    Sabitzer did make contact, but he tried to pull out and didn't use excessive force. It should have been a yellow, but the ref didn't see it and VAR can only get involved if they think it's a red card offence.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,266 ✭✭✭Garzorico


    Sabitzers tackle is described to a T in the first sentence

    “A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent”



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,622 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Did you actually watch it by any chance? Feels like you just saw a still or listened to Souness have a moan

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,387 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    Micced up referees explaining their decisions in-game would be a disaster, and would in fact be a failure for the same reason that VAR is a failure.

    Today you have refs making decisions that fans don't agree with. Make that change and tomorrow you will still have refs making decisions that fans don't agree with. The only difference is that now the unhappy fans will have specific ammo for their witch hunt.

    The Sabitzer foul today for example, do people really think it would be better if the ref stopped play to explain that he thought there were mitigating factors? Bullshit. The people who thought it should have been a red will still think it should have been a red and the ref will get a torrent of abuse for making a decision that they didn't agree with.

    These are subjective decisions and there will always be one side happy and one side sad about the decision made, so none of this technology actually solves the **** problem. Its depressing that the game of football does not seem to understand this concept.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,622 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    If you want to get that pedantic about it presumably tackling must simply just be removed from the game.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,947 ✭✭✭TheCitizen


    Of course it works. They wouldn’t be doing it if it didn’t work.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,526 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    There isn't 2 sides there are 3. Many of us don't resort to tribalism and would just like to know what is going on.

    The idea we will have a riot because the fans will see a replay or hear a decision (which is why soccer is not doing the same as rugby) is a fallacy. It's far worse that fans have to sit in the stand not having a clue why a VAR decision is or isn't given.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 258 ✭✭It is a Dunne Deal


    I don't think you can count Sabitzers foul as a tackle.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,439 ✭✭✭jacool


    wout.png

    I actually think that this type of tackling should be removed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,622 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    It's pretty much the textbook definition. Generally speaking a tackle/challenge of an opponent for the ball that doesn't result in your getting the ball but there is contact with the opponent is what we then call a foul. He went to challenge for the ball, saw he wasn't getting it, pulled out of it but still made contact, hence a foul. Should have been a yellow, if VAR could give a yellow I've no doubt he would have got one.

    If he had not been clearly attempting to avoid contact I would imagine VAR would have actually sent him off.

    If the ref had just booked him like he should have there wouldn't be much about it, though tbf bar the internet's I suppose there won't actually be much about it.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,387 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    You know what is going on, the ref didn't think it was a foul so the game continued.

    The idea that you should have an in depth analysis for everything that you think relevant, does nothing to improve the game itself. And thats ignoring that fact that what is considered "relevant" will likely be different depending on who is shouting at any particular moment.

    Fans are whinging now, put microphones on referees and the fans will still be whinging. What exactly is being solved?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,622 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Did you watch the game or just looking at the still?

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,526 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    I'm talking about the times VAR stops play for ages and the fan sitting in the stand has no clue why. No clue what so ever.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,072 ✭✭✭✭L'prof


    It definitely deserved a yellow. If he got a red there couldn’t be many complaints either though



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,622 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    I'd agree with that for sure, it's a straightforward yellow that I'm amazed the ref didn't give, though nothing should surprise with referees at the minute.

    If VAR gave him a red I don't think he could have complained yeah. He gave the ref and VAR the chance to send him off today I hope he learns from that because he was lucky to survive the moment.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,392 ✭✭✭✭Fitz*


    Fair play to MUST for this.

    For the sake of the league, you'd hope that this isn't the end of the oppositions and that there are no more statebacked ownerships.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,622 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    For the same of the league?

    Chelsea were bought by Abramovich a long time ago at this stage, City, Newcastle etc.

    The league sold it's soul long ago. If the league had anything about it the Glazers would have never been allowed buy United - they wouldn't be allowed if they tried today ironically

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 258 ✭✭It is a Dunne Deal


    I saw it live and thought he's in trouble here. Yes the still makes it look worse but if you make a challenge get nothing of the ball and your studs end end up on your opponents knee it is a red card absolute definition of reckless and endangering an opponent.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,439 ✭✭✭jacool


    I didn't watch the game live, no.

    That doesn't change my opinion on not liking tackles like that. I have a nice scar that rested me up for 6 months from something very similar.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,392 ✭✭✭✭Fitz*


    Do you want a league of statebackers having clubs acting as both a sportswashing vehicle and plaything?

    It's the Manchester derby this weekend, but really it's Qatar vs Abu Dhabi. It's not a local derby anymore, it's not about the local people. It's about which nation spent the most money. And haven't they done so much great work for the surrounding areas, what a great bunch of lads.


    If you can't beat them, join them. Is that it? I wonder how much money North Korea have lying around, will they choose to invest next? Tourism should soar there too if they get club X winning a few trophies. Maybe Putin after that. And then Syria possibly. Ah they'll win us a few leagues, I don't care who they are murdering on a daily basis as it allows me to wear a jersey down the pub again for the first time in 10 years and slag off my mates cos we finished ahead of them in the league table again this season. Mighty stuff.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement