Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Forgot your password?
|
Members
Total Members: 840
Latest: Azza New This Month: 2 New This Week: 2 New Today: 2
Stats
Total Posts: 66535
Total Topics: 4984
Most Online Today: 85
Most Online Ever: 17046
(Mon 29 Mar 2021 19:08)
Users Online Members: 15 Guests: 56 Total: 71
|
|
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Leggy
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 40
1
« on: Thu 28 Sep 2023 08:59 »
What a surprise… England getting Dharmesena.
A surprise? There are 16 umpires at the World Cup, but four cannot officiate at England games (because they are English) - leaving 12 to choose from. England play nine matches (**) so will need 18 on-field umpires. An even spread would mean them seeing six of the 12 available umpires once and the other six twice. From the appointments list England have Dharmesena twice. It was a 50/50 chance, but not really a surprise. ** - Which lasts longer - the Rugby Union or Cricket world cup?? Either way, they both seem to last forever!!
2
« on: Wed 27 Sep 2023 16:55 »
Reiffel and Tucker umpiring Pakistan v Australia in Pakistan….. surely there are better options than this?
Hyderabad is in India, isn't it?
3
« on: Tue 26 Sep 2023 18:35 »
The reason handball is so difficult to understand is simply because it has fundamentally and substantially changed every year for the last 4 or 5 years. As of last year, an arm above the head was always a handball except when a defender, who was attempting to play the ball, deflects the ball into their arm, even if the arm were stretched above the head. At the latest law change, that was removed and now it is a handball offense when a player "touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player's body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalized."
If you ask me, in their attempts to clarify the situation, IFAB have actually made the situation more and more difficult for referees, players, technical staff, and audiences to understand and have done a disservice to the game with regards to handball. Still, they will claim that the key to understanding the handball is the mythical "football understanding" which I'm starting to believe is a "you e?ither have it or you don't, and if you have to ask then you don't have it" type of catch-all.
Does putting your arm up to appeal for offside count as natural or unnatural ?
It was natural when it was the Arsenal back four under George Graham.
4
« on: Thu 21 Sep 2023 11:38 »
By today's tolerance levels, the cautions and send offs were pretty much "nailed on". Perhaps Mr. Coddington was just a man ahead of his time?
Also, what was striking was the lack of players crowding and arguing with Mr. Coddington. Can you imagine the reaction of the players if such a thing happened today?
5
« on: Thu 21 Sep 2023 11:29 »
On Christmas Day 1946 Barnsley played Southampton at Oakwell. Straight after the match both teams boarded a train, travelled to Southampton and played the return game on Boxing Day.
I believe that was the norm in the immediate post-war years. Not only would the clubs play the reverse fixture on Boxing Day but the referee would take both games. An examination of the Division 1 appointments (see "I Spy Old Refs") confirms this. Also, trains on Christmas Day - there's an idea!
6
« on: Sun 17 Sep 2023 19:28 »
Asia cup final
India v Sri Lanka
Referee - David Boon (Australia)
On field - Richard Illingworth (England) & Ahmed Shah Pakteen (Afghanistan)
TV - Chris Gaffaney (New Zealand)
Reserve - Jayamaran Madanagopal (India)
All over in under 25 overs, shortest cup final ever??
7
« on: Tue 12 Sep 2023 11:50 »
On 19th March 1994, Croydon FC played Staines town in the Isthmian League. For some reason, lost in the mists of time, Croydon FC had suffered a catastrophic financial meltdown and all their players had departed (for clubs that were willing to pay them). They desperately needed to complete the season - despite certain relegation - to retain their place in the Leage and pyramid structure. As a result they signed a bunch of enthusiastic youngsters of limited ability.
It was - literally - men against boys and a 14-0 result may have been an Isthmian League record.
The most challenging part of refereeing this fixture was keeping the score!
Ilford beat Leytonstone 15-1 way back in 1935/36
There have been two 14s - your match and another against the hapless Croydon team (Berkhamsted) that conceded 198 goals that season.
And yet, when the two clubs merged some years later, they took the name "Leytonstone and Ilford". You would have thought that Ilford would have had first dibs on names after a 15-1 victory!!
8
« on: Sun 10 Sep 2023 19:07 »
But there wasn’t anything wrong in the game to warrant some of the yellows. Luke Offord got booked for kicking the ball away although he helped Forest Green out as he kicked it to them as the ball had rolled a few yards away.
When he kicked the ball away, was he doing it to help Forest Green or prevent the restart of play?
9
« on: Sun 10 Sep 2023 10:34 »
Decided to get the Forest Green v Crewe game on ifollow today. Tom Parsons giving out 30 yellows in 6 games, both teams had to be on their best behaviour. But card happy Tom gave out another 7 yellows today. Now, I’m not slating the new rules, but half of the cards he gave today won’t have been given last season. He did give a yellow to the Crewe keeper for time wasting which was justified tbf. He never did anything wrong in the game tbh just needs to calm down on the yellows a bit!
If Tom Parsons is just implementing the "new rules" then perhaps it is the players who need to "calm down" a little and a reduction in the yellows will surely follow? As you said he did not do anything wrong in the game.
10
« on: Fri 08 Sep 2023 18:25 »
I thought it was a very interesting segment. While Howard Webb speaks very well and I personally think very genuinely, sometimes it is hard to explain what can just be a really poor error in judgement. Where he could talk through the process I felt he gave excellent analysis of where a thought process may have gone array.
In terms of the on field officials I thought there were a number of interesting points. While time in the game, score line, tensions etc. will of course vary, I felt some officials had more respect from players than others. It struck me that Anthony Taylor, Michael Oliver and Craig Pawson clearly had players respect and were extremely calm and comfortable on the pitch. They all had slightly different styles (Pawson was particularly laid back, Taylor more energetic) but all three, in my view at least, seemed very much at ease dealing with both VAR and players.
The next question is a little bit of a chicken and egg.
Was Anthony Taylor less 'shouty' and aggresive than John Brooks because he got less dissent for his decision (which was wrong) or did he get less dissent because of his calm authoritative manner. Difficult to tell. I do wonder if the fact Taylor, Oliver and Pawson all have at least a decade now in the Premier league means players are more familiar with them and afford them a little more deference. I think a number of things are at play and it is a combination of effects but personally, I do think players might, to some degree, feel they have more chance of rattling newer referees. Or at least have less respect for and rapport with them.
Saying all this, while Mr. Brooks may not have been ideal in his communication, given the lack of respect from Liverpool players, I don't particularly think his shouting at Van Dijk "Go, go now" was overly inappropriate. I think perhaps issuing sanctions to other players who surrounded him could have helped.
In all likelihood though, I am over analyzing. Mr. Brooks got the call right and sometimes, referees can't always and should not always present a non aggressive image. I can think of incidents, earlier in their career where all three, Taylor Oliver and Pawson looked uncomposed and rattled on the pitch. Comes with time imagine.
A final thought - I think the general reaction has been a little disappointing from what I have seen. It is so hard to gauge the opinion of the 'average' fan from what one reads online but to the small extent you can, it hasn't been overly receptive.
You are 100% correct that players will try to "rattle" a newer referee. Whether that is John Brooks in the Premier League or a youngster on the parks. The players will try it on with the "greenhorn" while saving their energy with a grizzled old ref that they know of old. As a coda to the VVD incident, the player has had a extra game added to his ban and been relieved of £100km while the referee has just been appointed to a Euro 2024 qualifier involving Portugal. I think that shows who was in the right and who was not.
11
« on: Wed 06 Sep 2023 17:17 »
Before we rush to judgement on what the referees are saying to the players (e.g. John Brooks to VVD), it would be helpful to hear what is being said to them. I suspect that cannot be shared in a programme such as this for a number of reasons, not least the volume of "bleeping" it might entail.
During the VAR check, John Brooks reassured VVD that it was being checked but reminded him that he would have to leave the field immediately if the check confirmed the red card - this is in accordance with Law and would prevent any further action for either refusing to leave the field or for verbal misconduct. Its a shame VVD was not listening.
12
« on: Mon 04 Sep 2023 18:56 »
On 19th March 1994, Croydon FC played Staines town in the Isthmian League. For some reason, lost in the mists of time, Croydon FC had suffered a catastrophic financial meltdown and all their players had departed (for clubs that were willing to pay them). They desperately needed to complete the season - despite certain relegation - to retain their place in the Leage and pyramid structure. As a result they signed a bunch of enthusiastic youngsters of limited ability.
It was - literally - men against boys and a 14-0 result may have been an Isthmian League record.
The most challenging part of refereeing this fixture was keeping the score!
13
« on: Sun 03 Sep 2023 13:52 »
Having not seen the incident, my question is about refereeing personalities, pecking orders and the possible downside of using "colleagues" as VAR's.
Would there have been a VAR intervention if the referee was Tony Harrington and the VAR Michael Oliver?
14
« on: Wed 30 Aug 2023 17:00 »
I find this a little embarrassing. Referees are the ones who are expected to know (and be able to correctly apply) those obscure aspects of the Laws of the Game that do not happen frequently.
Its an opportunity to look competent, alert and in control.
Unfortunately, in this case, none of the above attributes apply.
15
« on: Tue 29 Aug 2023 18:40 »
I don't fully understand the reasoning behind these formal complaints. The PGMOL have, under Howard Webb, shown themselves very willing to publicly apologise when a referee makes a significant error. They have not seen fit to do so in this case, correctly in my view, so surely it would be better for Nottingham Forest to discuss with the PGMOL privately any concerns they have. What is the expectation of this complaint? An apology? Atwell to be punished? It isn't clear to me what purpose this serves other than to set up a somewhat adversarial relationship, publicly, between the clubs and the PGMOL.
To be clear, of course clubs should have the right to complain. I just feel this method is rather vague and meaningless and possibly not conducive with a positive outcome for all involved. Transparency is good, but this seems only a semi transparent process with all we know being that a club is unhappy with a refereeing performance, formally.
If there is something in the process I am missing I would be delighted if any better informed posters (most on here are!) could inform me?
They know full well it won't do any good, but its a marker for a future game. Players do it all the time in games - they are seeking to put doubt in the mind of the referee so the next 50/50 decision goes their way.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 40
|
Home
Forum
Search
Contact
Login
Register
Show Posts