International Football - England - Euros - World Cup Etc

[Paplane]

I agree - it makes sense that in cricket it is used as the very purpose of the sport is to get batsmen out. In football it's stupid. So it might have touched a bit of hair - the direction of the ball nor the speed changed. Okay so him jumping for the ball meant the defender behind him was blindsided but the jumper was not offside.

What I would like them to take from cricket is things like umpires call. If no obvious mistake has been made by the ref or it's subjective and marginal then it goes with the decision on the pitch. I also think a maximum time an incident can be reviewed should be applied before going with the on field decision - sometimes it can be 3-4 minute to decide if a toe nail is offside. Finally I would be happy for teams to have var reviews like in test cricket. Each team has two which can be used on certain incidents - var then only gets involved either when the ref requests it or a team requests it. I feel something needs to happen because currently the system is just rubbish

The 'umpires call' thing has kinda been unofficially happening in this World Cup. I can't recall too many of the subjective decisions being overturned. Like the Kane one for example again.

I think VAR has been decent in this world cup. It just sits in the background and doesn't try to re-ref the game. 95% of decisions have been quickly made. And the refs on the pitch aren't being fooled by players going down easily. There's robust challenges gone in and play has been allowed to continue. It's all a far cry from the Premier League's standards, who should take a real look at how FIFA are doing it.

[Plymouth red]

I agree - it makes sense that in cricket it is used as the very purpose of the sport is to get batsmen out. In football it's stupid. So it might have touched a bit of hair - the direction of the ball nor the speed changed. Okay so him jumping for the ball meant the defender behind him was blindsided but the jumper was not offside.

What I would like them to take from cricket is things like umpires call. If no obvious mistake has been made by the ref or it's subjective and marginal then it goes with the decision on the pitch. I also think a maximum time an incident can be reviewed should be applied before going with the on field decision - sometimes it can be 3-4 minute to decide if a toe nail is offside. Finally I would be happy for teams to have var reviews like in test cricket. Each team has two which can be used on certain incidents - var then only gets involved either when the ref requests it or a team requests it. I feel something needs to happen because currently the system is just rubbish

The 'umpires call' thing has kinda been unofficially happening in this World Cup. I can't recall too many of the subjective decisions being overturned. Like the Kane one for example again.

I think VAR has been decent in this world cup. It just sits in the background and doesn't try to re-ref the game. 95% of decisions have been quickly made. And the refs on the pitch aren't being fooled by players going down easily. There's robust challenges gone in and play has been allowed to continue. It's all a far cry from the Premier League's standards, who should take a real look at how FIFA are doing it.

Didn't collina come out and say that he wanted the refereeing in this WC to use the premier League style of var and reffing... So either they are doing it better than the premier League or the sample size of matches is too small or we as fans/media are just not as invested in the world cup as we are our own clubs so are being more balanced. Ultimately it doesn't impact us if Croatia get knocked out. I don't know but I do know if that decision had happened to forest in the 96th minute that ultimately cost us our place in the league or denied us a cup win, I would be fuming.

[DeesideRed]

Disagree on Kane's one, the reason he was off balance was the defender behind him clearly pushes him, not enough for a foul in its own right probably but enough to put him off balance so he is already falling when he gets taken out by the keeper.

I remember the classic example was a young 19yo Michael Owen fouled but tried to stay on his feet for a few steps before falling. He was hammered by his coach (poss Houllier?) for not going down as the pen wasnt given.

[DeesideRed]

I agree - it makes sense that in cricket it is used as the very purpose of the sport is to get batsmen out. In football it's stupid. So it might have touched a bit of hair - the direction of the ball nor the speed changed. Okay so him jumping for the ball meant the defender behind him was blindsided but the jumper was not offside.

What I would like them to take from cricket is things like umpires call. If no obvious mistake has been made by the ref or it's subjective and marginal then it goes with the decision on the pitch. I also think a maximum time an incident can be reviewed should be applied before going with the on field decision - sometimes it can be 3-4 minute to decide if a toe nail is offside. Finally I would be happy for teams to have var reviews like in test cricket. Each team has two which can be used on certain incidents - var then only gets involved either when the ref requests it or a team requests it. I feel something needs to happen because currently the system is just rubbish

The 'umpires call' thing has kinda been unofficially happening in this World Cup. I can't recall too many of the subjective decisions being overturned. Like the Kane one for example again.

I think VAR has been decent in this world cup. It just sits in the background and doesn't try to re-ref the game. 95% of decisions have been quickly made. And the refs on the pitch aren't being fooled by players going down easily. There's robust challenges gone in and play has been allowed to continue. It's all a far cry from the Premier League's standards, who should take a real look at how FIFA are doing it.

Didn't collina come out and say that he wanted the refereeing in this WC to use the premier League style of var and reffing... So either they are doing it better than the premier League or the sample size of matches is too small or we as fans/media are just not as invested in the world cup as we are our own clubs so are being more balanced. Ultimately it doesn't impact us if Croatia get knocked out. I don't know but I do know if that decision had happened to forest in the 96th minute that ultimately cost us our place in the league or denied us a cup win, I would be fuming.

The amount of contact being allowed is definitely the premier league model in comparison to the continental version. Some games have been all the better for it.

[wassy04]

Disagree on Kane's one, the reason he was off balance was the defender behind him clearly pushes him, not enough for a foul in its own right probably but enough to put him off balance so he is already falling when he gets taken out by the keeper.

I remember the classic example was a young 19yo Michael Owen fouled but tried to stay on his feet for a few steps before falling. He was hammered by his coach (poss Houllier?) for not going down as the pen wasnt given.

Yes that is the classic dilemma, however in this case the initial contact wasn't a foul but it just knocked him off balance so that he was already slightly falling when the keeper took him out. Slowed down it makes it look like a bit of a dive when in reality, there wasn't a lot he could do. 

Without the contact from the defender, I suspect it looks more of a certain pen or he rounds the keeper and scores.

[wassy04]

I agree - it makes sense that in cricket it is used as the very purpose of the sport is to get batsmen out. In football it's stupid. So it might have touched a bit of hair - the direction of the ball nor the speed changed. Okay so him jumping for the ball meant the defender behind him was blindsided but the jumper was not offside.

What I would like them to take from cricket is things like umpires call. If no obvious mistake has been made by the ref or it's subjective and marginal then it goes with the decision on the pitch. I also think a maximum time an incident can be reviewed should be applied before going with the on field decision - sometimes it can be 3-4 minute to decide if a toe nail is offside. Finally I would be happy for teams to have var reviews like in test cricket. Each team has two which can be used on certain incidents - var then only gets involved either when the ref requests it or a team requests it. I feel something needs to happen because currently the system is just rubbish

The 'umpires call' thing has kinda been unofficially happening in this World Cup. I can't recall too many of the subjective decisions being overturned. Like the Kane one for example again.

I think VAR has been decent in this world cup. It just sits in the background and doesn't try to re-ref the game. 95% of decisions have been quickly made. And the refs on the pitch aren't being fooled by players going down easily. There's robust challenges gone in and play has been allowed to continue. It's all a far cry from the Premier League's standards, who should take a real look at how FIFA are doing it.

Didn't collina come out and say that he wanted the refereeing in this WC to use the premier League style of var and reffing... So either they are doing it better than the premier League or the sample size of matches is too small or we as fans/media are just not as invested in the world cup as we are our own clubs so are being more balanced. Ultimately it doesn't impact us if Croatia get knocked out. I don't know but I do know if that decision had happened to forest in the 96th minute that ultimately cost us our place in the league or denied us a cup win, I would be fuming.

The amount of contact being allowed is definitely the premier league model in comparison to the continental version. Some games have been all the better for it.

Yeah the games where its applied have definitely been better. The main issue with the refereeing in this world cup is the massive inconsistency game to game of how they are applying to laws. You've just no idea what is a foul and what is not. Or a game like England v Ghana where the ref just gives absolutely everything but only gives out one yellow. Think it was a record for fouls conceded. 

Kane's one was not given and then you get one given for Belgium in literally the next game where the ball is nowhere and he's clearly looking for contact. Surely, you can only have one not the other.

Not forgetting that one that is overruled for Germany, or the France non pen or Balogun being sent off but Messi staying on for an almost identical tackle (no need to guess what happened there).

[Plymouth red]

The 'umpires call' thing has kinda been unofficially happening in this World Cup. I can't recall too many of the subjective decisions being overturned. Like the Kane one for example again.

I think VAR has been decent in this world cup. It just sits in the background and doesn't try to re-ref the game. 95% of decisions have been quickly made. And the refs on the pitch aren't being fooled by players going down easily. There's robust challenges gone in and play has been allowed to continue. It's all a far cry from the Premier League's standards, who should take a real look at how FIFA are doing it.

Didn't collina come out and say that he wanted the refereeing in this WC to use the premier League style of var and reffing... So either they are doing it better than the premier League or the sample size of matches is too small or we as fans/media are just not as invested in the world cup as we are our own clubs so are being more balanced. Ultimately it doesn't impact us if Croatia get knocked out. I don't know but I do know if that decision had happened to forest in the 96th minute that ultimately cost us our place in the league or denied us a cup win, I would be fuming.

The amount of contact being allowed is definitely the premier league model in comparison to the continental version. Some games have been all the better for it.

Yeah the games where its applied have definitely been better. The main issue with the refereeing in this world cup is the massive inconsistency game to game of how they are applying to laws. You've just no idea what is a foul and what is not. Or a game like England v Ghana where the ref just gives absolutely everything but only gives out one yellow. Think it was a record for fouls conceded. 

Kane's one was not given and then you get one given for Belgium in literally the next game where the ball is nowhere and he's clearly looking for contact. Surely, you can only have one not the other.

Not forgetting that one that is overruled for Germany, or the France non pen or Balogun being sent off but Messi staying on for an almost identical tackle (no need to guess what happened there).

I'm not sure he gave everything otherwise Ghana would have had a penalty.

[wassy04]

I think VAR has been decent in this world cup. It just sits in the background and doesn't try to re-ref the game. 95% of decisions have been quickly made. And the refs on the pitch aren't being fooled by players going down easily. There's robust challenges gone in and play has been allowed to continue. It's all a far cry from the Premier League's standards, who should take a real look at how FIFA are doing it.

Didn't collina come out and say that he wanted the refereeing in this WC to use the premier League style of var and reffing... So either they are doing it better than the premier League or the sample size of matches is too small or we as fans/media are just not as invested in the world cup as we are our own clubs so are being more balanced. Ultimately it doesn't impact us if Croatia get knocked out. I don't know but I do know if that decision had happened to forest in the 96th minute that ultimately cost us our place in the league or denied us a cup win, I would be fuming.

The amount of contact being allowed is definitely the premier league model in comparison to the continental version. Some games have been all the better for it.

Yeah the games where its applied have definitely been better. The main issue with the refereeing in this world cup is the massive inconsistency game to game of how they are applying to laws. You've just no idea what is a foul and what is not. Or a game like England v Ghana where the ref just gives absolutely everything but only gives out one yellow. Think it was a record for fouls conceded. 

Kane's one was not given and then you get one given for Belgium in literally the next game where the ball is nowhere and he's clearly looking for contact. Surely, you can only have one not the other.

Not forgetting that one that is overruled for Germany, or the France non pen or Balogun being sent off but Messi staying on for an almost identical tackle (no need to guess what happened there).

I'm not sure he gave everything otherwise Ghana would have had a penalty.

Lol yeah that just makes it even worse!

[Salvatore Matrecano]

Anyone else smelling a rat about the change in kick off time? Cool evening in the rain to boiling hot and humid, wonder who that favours?

[Sausage Roll]

There are thunderstorms forecast for the current kickoff time and midday there is only forecast to be 22 Celsius and rain so shouldn't be too bad.

[Plymouth red]

Anyone else smelling a rat about the change in kick off time? Cool evening in the rain to boiling hot and humid, wonder who that favours?

The forecast looks fine - 22 degrees with chance of showers. Time of day won't impact altitude. And it's a more civilised kick off time over here. Think it's a sensible call considering the weather that evening could see the game delayed by two or three hours

[JohnG]

No thunder on BBC forecast