It's a European tournament, find a European ref to explain the rules not some Yank.
I find it to be incredibly patronising.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
It's a European tournament, find a European ref to explain the rules not some Yank.
I find it to be incredibly patronising.
What is Euro or WC without the English/British vs the rest of the world argument.
Ha, the irony!
That is an interesting idea
If a wafer thin brush of the ball by a defenders hand has to be penalised, then make the punishment fit the crime.
Awarding a penalty for that is like just gifting the opposition a completely unfair advantage for what is a minor infraction.
It will never happen because it would open up such a can of worms with more questions than answers.
She is good and she knows her shit and very passionate about her role but she's a robotic shill drinking from the FIFA cool aid so all she knows best is how to justify the crap by talking a load of shit to baffle people into submission.
It's basically Peter Walton with lipstick.
But this tells you how referees are being taught to see the game, they just 100% stick by the rules even if the rules are a load of shite, refs are just a load of automated robots and don't have personality anymore hence why we get these decisions where they don't use any common sense.
Funny looking at the faces of Ange, Wrighy and Keane though, I genuinely thought they wanted to tell her to shut up
I already explained. The ref and the linesman.
If they make a clear and obvious error then VAR will overrule the original decision.
If the guy's toenail is offside that is not a clear and obvious error.
I mean it's flawed but it's the only objective way you're going to get any sort of consistency on offsides otherwise what's the alternative?
The problem with “clear and obvious” and “common sense” is that your idea of clear and obvious may not be mine and vice versa.
The ref maybe thinks a guy is a yard offside, has it checked and it’s a toenail off. He thought it to be clear and obvious, but it turned out not to be quite so clear. Still the correct decision.
The only way to get rid of this toenail offside, snick on the hand stuff is to scrap VAR completely and go back to calling the referee a cunt every few minutes.
The chip is for the semi automated offsides, it removes the need for a person to decide on what frame to take/ when the ball was kicked.
They can use it for handball is a added 'bonus'. Where it's been used is moot anyway as the camera can see it hit his hand, this just speeds it up
Do you find the Australian pundit patronising for not being European too?
I thought she explained the rules clearly. I don't see what's patronising about it?
Good question!
Think since the game yesterday about offside.
The full body must stand again in front of the defense player.
1 mm offside - that is a joke.
Hand?
Hand is hand - intentional, accidental - it doesn't matter.
I'm concerned that the referee's decisions on the pitch are increasingly being taken away from him.
And waiting for the result - goal or no goal - is really getting on my nerves.
Football must coming home again!
This not you then?
This wasn't also a real post-that followed in response to your complaint:
...And you didn't hit the agree button?
Ummmm... Not it isn't; it's me responding to a post of YOURS that YOU said I needed to read in order to understand where you were coming from.... A post of YOURS that was 90%+ VAR-moan.
Sorry; but even now you're still conflating explanation of the process(s) and knowing the rules with not liking said rules and objecting to the presence of VAR.
Towards the end of the show the ref pundit even said that SHE wasn't particularly at peace with the spirit of one of the rules she'd just explained. (Personally, I thought that was quite refreshing to hear; cos none of the PGMOL-bots in the UK would dare be quite so candid and human in their equivalent role on Sky's 'ref watch' segments).
Whilst this is partly facetious on your part (cos ref's are also called upon to made subjective decisions)...... Sure; no-one said the debate/complaining ends because a rule gets explained.
......But the fact is that both big calls in last night's game were objective given what the rule-book dictates in 2024.
There will always need to be a line (figurative or literal) drawn at some point when judging off-side so quibbling about how tight a decision is is a waste of time.......
(A goal via Hawkeye is also determined by "toe-nail lengths" so what's the difference? ....There's an objective decision to be reached; let the tech take the weight.)
If Refs are going to start judging 'degree of advantage gained' when it comes to off-sides that would require them to estimate potential acceleration of the respective players involved in the incident (amongst other things like time and distance)...... In real-time. Which of course would be a clusterfuck in waiting.
VAR for offsides is fine; they just need to continue to speed it the fuck up by further improving the automation process of it.
Last edited:
You really truly are an idiot. Somebody has to explain it to most of you dumbasses...very much you included. I've been on this particular Spurs' sight for ~6 years and it is but a very small % of "British football fans" here that should find her insight superfluous...and you wouldn't be one of them.
I've watched a Scouser fantasy NFL youtube show...because they've put in the time and know what they are talking about...better than many Americans. But I guess that's just the little Englander inside you that prevents you from hearing it from an American, right? How fucking small are you? Anyone with any kind of dignity would be ashamed of putting out such a smallman sentiment as you just have...proudly, hoping to entice other morons to cosign your stupidity, insularity, and small-mindedness.
Neil Reynolds - Englishman, comms on Sky Sports and also hits on the US NFL network. Absolutely knows his stuff and is better than the majority of US comms...hands down. If most on this board understood football as well as this 'foreigner' understands NFL there would be fewer daily idiotic statements such as yours. Hell, if your national team manager understood football as well as this guy understands NFL then your performances wouldn't be so fucking dire.
We're gonna get pucked, mate.
Yeah, but she explained the American rules instead of the UEFA rules. /s
Also, there are LOADS of British players and ex-footie stars of all kinds on American TV shows doing punditry. Robbie Earl and that other guy even basically have their own NBC show where they explain football to an American audience. The US pundits are the minority on that show.
Also, there are LOADS of British players and ex-footie stars of all kinds on American TV shows doing punditry. Robbie Earl and that other guy even basically have their own NBC show where they explain football to an American audience. The US pundits are the minority on that show.
I like those two..... It's far easier to let them wash over you than it is the fleet of obnoxious, biased, attention-hungry cunts that Sky is inundated with.
Other guy is Robbie Mustoe.
Last edited:
