RateTheRef

I thought Attwell judged the match perfectly ,  let things go was consistent and stepped in when he needed to , very little if any of players surrounding him today as for Utd another poor performance our season is in danger of finishing like a lead balloon

Probably a much easier afternoon for Attwell than  he could have imagined. He was aided by the fact that one of the teams was seemingly entirely disinterested in proceedings.

On the point regarding international duty, there used to be (perhaps still is) a process through which national association could apply to FIFA to have players banned from playing for their club for a period after the break if they felt that their withdrawal from the squad was questionable. I recall the Senegalese authorities imposing such a punishment in Papiss Cisse meaning he missed Newcastle games when they doubted the validity of his withdrawal from their squad. I assume that the England hierarchy would be reluctant to upset the clubs by using this, but I assume it’s still there if there are doubts about the veracity of a withdrawal from international duty.

Quote from: Boggle on Sun 02 Apr 2023 23:07

Probably a much easier afternoon for Attwell than  he could have imagined. He was aided by the fact that one of the teams was seemingly entirely disinterested in proceedings.

On the point regarding international duty, there used to be (perhaps still is) a process through which national association could apply to FIFA to have players banned from playing for their club for a period after the break if they felt that their withdrawal from the squad was questionable. I recall the Senegalese authorities imposing such a punishment in Papiss Cisse meaning he missed Newcastle games when they doubted the validity of his withdrawal from their squad. I assume that the England hierarchy would be reluctant to upset the clubs by using this, but I assume it’s still there if there are doubts about the veracity of a withdrawal from international duty.

Sounds like a overreaching of FIFA’s responsibilities for me

Not really - if a player is genuinely injured and there is no international break then the player, lets call them "Sicknote", misses one or two games for their club anyhow.  Unscrupulous clubs have phantom injuries so that "Sicknote" can rest and go on holiday whilst rival clubs are Conscientious and send their players on international duty - one of their players, lets call them "Honorable", is injured and misses the next one or two games for their club.  In other words some clubs are looking to gain an unfair advantage by holding their players back from international duty.

Quote from: Microscopist on Mon 03 Apr 2023 08:57

Quote from: ajb95 on Sun 02 Apr 2023 23:18

Quote from: Boggle on Sun 02 Apr 2023 23:07

Probably a much easier afternoon for Attwell than  he could have imagined. He was aided by the fact that one of the teams was seemingly entirely disinterested in proceedings.

On the point regarding international duty, there used to be (perhaps still is) a process through which national association could apply to FIFA to have players banned from playing for their club for a period after the break if they felt that their withdrawal from the squad was questionable. I recall the Senegalese authorities imposing such a punishment in Papiss Cisse meaning he missed Newcastle games when they doubted the validity of his withdrawal from their squad. I assume that the England hierarchy would be reluctant to upset the clubs by using this, but I assume it’s still there if there are doubts about the veracity of a withdrawal from international duty.

Sounds like a overreaching of FIFA’s responsibilities for me

Not really - if a player is genuinely injured and there is no international break then the player, lets call them "Sicknote", misses one or two games for their club anyhow.  Unscrupulous clubs have phantom injuries so that "Sicknote" can rest and go on holiday whilst rival clubs are Conscientious and send their players on international duty - one of their players, lets call them "Honorable", is injured and misses the next one or two games for their club.  In other words some clubs are looking to gain an unfair advantage by holding their players back from international duty.

Can you blame the players though? They are paid by their clubs and don't want to risk getting injured in some irrelevant friendlies and qualifiers. Maybe if Southgate actually picked inform players rather than those who haven't played all season, they might stop faking injuries.

My opinion - if they are willing to fake injuries because they consider the game beneath them because it is just some friendly or qualifier then they should not be picked again - ever, whoever they are. They should be replaced permanently by the players who still consider it an honour to pull on their national kit regardless of the game. You don't want to do the qualifiers, fine, you don't then get the reward of doing the tournaments as you played no part in the team qualifying for them. I bet they would no longer be spending a week-10 days recovering and rehabilitating in Dubai, or wherever, during the International breaks.

Rashford was so badly injured he went on holiday to New York.

Don’t understand why posters on here don’t think a footballer can have a few days off to rest and recover having inevitably picked up a few knocks through the season

Times reporting rashford had to pass a fitness test to play at Newcastle so was touch and go whether he played or not