Football 17/18

[mjsell]

Completely agree Tent, should never be a red. 

NZ update - managed to catch Motd this morning. Don't think I'm going to be able to see much live stuff over here unfortunately, but motd at half 9 on a Sunday morning worked nicely. 

[The Nal]

18 hours ago, thetime said:

  

Who needs Coutinho eh?

[thetime]

Just now, The Nal said:

Who needs Coutinho eh?

I think they would of needed coutinho, neymar, Suarez and messi to snatch a draw with that defence. 

[LJS]

 

[CRW5252]

20 hours ago, TheGayTent said:

Horse shit. The laws haven't stopped it have they? They won't stop it, any striker in that situation goes for the ball. Every single time. It's an accident, plain and simple. Yet Mane gets 3 games now no different to a player that deliberately makes a two footed challenge with no chance of getting the ball? 

Not a red card in a month of Sunday's. Can't believe anyone who has played the game at any level agrees that that challenge should result in a red card. 

Lunacy. Utter lunacy. 

What kind of logic is that? The laws haven't stopped all two footed tackles but they have reduced the number of them. When a player goes for the ball in that situation they should go with their head, not leading with a high boot. I have no doubt it was an accident but that is not relevant. It was a dangerous challenge that could end careers. 

I find it bizarre people don't think we should remove it from the game. Did Mane need to go in with his boot? No. It is dangerous and there is no need for it. 

[pink_triangle]

30 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

What kind of logic is that? The laws haven't stopped all two footed tackles but they have reduced the number of them. When a player goes for the ball in that situation they should go with their head, not leading with a high boot. I have no doubt it was an accident but that is not relevant. It was a dangerous challenge that could end careers. 

Is there much evidence of similar tackles ending careers?

[TheGayTent]

2 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

The laws haven't stopped all two footed tackles but they have reduced the number of them.

You have evidence for this presumably and the game has improved for it.

2 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

I have no doubt it was an accident but that is not relevant.

It is not relevant to what? Whether it's a foul or not? Agreed. 

Whether it's a red card or not? Disagree. 

2 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

It was a dangerous challenge that could end careers. 

Show me a similar challenge that has ended a career....

2 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

I find it bizarre people don't think we should remove it from the game. Did Mane need to go in with his boot? No. It is dangerous and there is no need for it. 

The whole point of the game is to stick the round thing in the net thing. 

That was what Mane was trying to do. Completely innocently.

He mistimed his challenge by milliseconds. Free kick, carry on. Give him a yellow if you must.

Don't ruin a perfectly good game. 

[CRW5252]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

Is there much evidence of similar tackles ending careers?

You only need a bit of common sense to realize how dangerous kicking someone in the face with studs up is. 

[kaosmark2]

Well I didn't expect that result today. Fully deserved though, we were the better team. Twice the chances despite half the possession. I worry for Swansea if they can't craft chances at home vs our 2nd string defense.

Still, top half!

[CRW5252]

36 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

You have evidence for this presumably and the game has improved for it.

No study has been done that I know of but it is common sense that it would.

 

37 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Show me a similar challenge that has ended a career....

See above and use some common sense.

 

39 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

The whole point of the game is to stick the round thing in the net thing.

Agreed but lets do this without kicking people in the face or at least attempt to reduce the amount it happens. 

 

40 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

He mistimed his challenge by milliseconds. Free kick, carry on. Give him a yellow if you must.

He shouldn't have his foot that high when challenging for a ball that is near head height. 

 

43 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Don't ruin a perfectly good game. 

5-0 was a pretty good watch for me.

 

I think the real question is: why do players need to challenge for aerial duels with their feet? It is a habit that a lot of fans are used to seeing so they think it should stay on that basis. I know change can be tough to deal with and some people love to say how much better and tougher football was 20 years ago but it has moved on. This is for the safety of players. Mane knows the rules (at least he should) and putting your foot that high in an aerial dual was always going to put him at risk for a sending off.

[TheGayTent]

38 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

No study has been done that I know of but it is common sense that it would.

So basically just your opinion. 

38 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

See above and use some common sense.

So we're agreed that you're talking shit. 

38 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

Agreed but lets do this without kicking people in the face or at least attempt to reduce the amount it happens. 

We've established that your thesis doesn't reduce the amount it happens but it does ruin games of football?

38 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

5-0 was a pretty good watch for me.

I think you're in a very small minority. 

Not that that in itself makes you wrong but it's true nonetheless.

38 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

I think the real question is: why do players need to challenge for aerial duels with their feet?

Instinct I'd suggest. 

38 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

It is a habit that a lot of fans are used to seeing so they think it should stay on that basis. I know change can be tough to deal with and some people love to say how much better and tougher football was 20 years ago but it has moved on. This is for the safety of players.

This isn't Formula 1 in the 70s. Players aren't dying as result of very rare accidental collisions between forwards and goalkeepers....

38 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

Mane knows the rules (at least he should) and putting your foot that high in an aerial dual was always going to put him at risk for a sending off.

True. Due to current laws. Which are bollocks.

[WS_Jack_III]

1 hour ago, kaosmark2 said:

Well I didn't expect that result today. Fully deserved though, we were the better team. Twice the chances despite half the possession. I worry for Swansea if they can't craft chances at home vs our 2nd string defense.

Still, top half!

Would have took a draw, glad to see we're picking up points. I had a mini meltdown after the league cup game.

[kaosmark2]

4 minutes ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Would have took a draw, glad to see we're picking up points. I had a mini meltdown after the league cup game.

I'd have taken a draw beforehand as well. Was very glad how the game went. Merino looks a player doesn't he?

[pink_triangle]

8 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

You only need a bit of common sense to realize how dangerous kicking someone in the face with studs up is. 

To me a red card should be a deterrent to either stop a serious injury or something that effects the integrity of the game such as hacking down the player through on goal or handball on the line.

If there is evidence to suggest tackles like this are causing significant risk of injuries then I would be fine with the red card, my guess is that it's pretty rare.

[The Nal]

Thought it was a red myself. Keeper went with his head and won the ball, Mane went with his foot and didn't win the ball. Both feet (well) off the floor, studs showing, endangered the opponent, red card. If this was in midfield on an outfield player it would clearly be a red so I don't see the difference. 

The real story is Liverpools defence. 10 men or not its an utter shambles. Rather hilariously so. They'll do nowt this season with it.

How long are we giving De Boer at Palace? The weekend?

Edited September 11, 2017 by The Nal

[WS_Jack_III]

9 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

I'd have taken a draw beforehand as well. Was very glad how the game went. Merino looks a player doesn't he?

Looking like the find of the window so far, be interesting to see if Shelvey makes it back in the team.

[jyoung]

1 hour ago, The Nal said:

How long are we giving De Boer at Palace? The weekend?

Four games really isn't long enough to implement a new style of football is it?! There's all the talk of football being a 'results' game and I suppose if you're Barcelona and lose four on the bounce there might be reason to blame someone and send them packing... It's Palace though. No disrespect to them lot but they're gonna lose games. I'd stick with him a little longer. Performances and results will improve, I'm sure. It might be a case of De Boer adapting his techniques as well as the team adapting theirs, though. 

[The Nal]

11 minutes ago, jyoung said:

Four games really isn't long enough to implement a new style of football is it?! 

No its madness but 4 games, 4 losses, no goals scored in modern footie and thats a huge crisis. 

[jyoung]

3 minutes ago, The Nal said:

No its madness but 4 games, 4 losses, no goals scored in modern footie and thats a huge crisis. 

I suppose you're right. They've got two hugely important games up next, both at home to Southampton and Huddersfield. They'll need to get points from those as afterwards they play City, United and Chelsea. I know in the Premier League anything can happen but you wouldn't expect much from those games on current form. Perhaps there is reason to be worried after all.

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, The Nal said:

The real story is Liverpools defence. 10 men or not its an utter shambles. Rather hilariously so. They'll do nowt this season with it.

It's the same defence as last season, which had that shit defence finish above your own team.

The real story is Klopp's shit substitutions. Does anyone have any idea why he took off the only player on the field who would hold City back towards their own half, and perhaps cause a rash challenge from defenders already on yellows, to give Liverpool half a chance?

Or brought on in his place the man with two crushing debuts, a shit last game, and a disinterested Liverpool debut?

City would have had Liverpool on Saturday without the sending off, cos City were on their game and Liverpool weren't. Klopp made it worse than it might have been, but it's as simple as that.

But ultimately, Saturday's game is as meaningful for finishing positions as Arsenal's twonking a few weeks back or Liverpool's twonkings of all the top teams last season or even Utd's bore-draws against them.

 

[The Nal]

28 minutes ago, jyoung said:

I suppose you're right. They've got two hugely important games up next, both at home to Southampton and Huddersfield. They'll need to get points from those as afterwards they play City, United and Chelsea. I know in the Premier League anything can happen but you wouldn't expect much from those games on current form. Perhaps there is reason to be worried after all.

Seems he won't be around for them. Looks like hes just been sacked. 

1 hour ago, The Nal said:

How long are we giving De Boer at Palace? 

So the answer to my own question was "about 45 minutes." 

19 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

It's the same defence as last season, which had that shit defence finish above your own team.

The real story is Klopp's shit substitutions. Does anyone have any idea why he took off the only player on the field who would hold City back towards their own half, and perhaps cause a rash challenge from defenders already on yellows, to give Liverpool half a chance?

Or brought on in his place the man with two crushing debuts, a shit last game, and a disinterested Liverpool debut?

City would have had Liverpool on Saturday without the sending off, cos City were on their game and Liverpool weren't. Klopp made it worse than it might have been, but it's as simple as that.

But ultimately, Saturday's game is as meaningful for finishing positions as Arsenal's twonking a few weeks back or Liverpool's twonkings of all the top teams last season or even Utd's bore-draws against them.

 

Agree with all that - Im firmly on the jury thats still out on Klopp -  lost 5/6 finals, 3 trophies in 16 seasons, hasn't won a trophy since 2012, less points than Rodgers after the same amount of games etc - but ball after ball being casually passed through the centre of defence is going to raise eyebrows from Klopp in the video session tjhis morning at Melwood. Basic basic stuff. Almost like De Bruyne couldn't believe how easy it was. 2 disallowed goals aswell remember and other chances. Could've been 7 or 8 on another day easy.

Edited September 11, 2017 by The Nal

[pink_triangle]

7 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Seems he won't be around for them. Looks like hes just been sacked. 

Agree with all that - Im firmly on the jury thats still out on Klopp -  lost 5/6 finals, 3 trophies in 16 seasons, hasn't won a trophy since 2012, 

Although which managers with 4th-6th budgets are winning things on a regular basis? Which team not called Bayern Munich is regularly winning trophies in Germany.

[The Nal]

13 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Although which managers with 4th-6th budgets are winning things on a regular basis? Which team not called Bayern Munich is regularly winning trophies in Germany.

The next good team when Bayern are in transition but I agree yeah. 1 out of 6 finals is a shite record though. 

Sacking a manager who was hired to implement a new playing style after 4 games is an odd one. Hodgson in. 2 year deal. 

Edited September 11, 2017 by The Nal

[eFestivals]

20 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Could've been 7 or 8 on another day easy.

like that sort of claim all the time, it's only really true if all chances go in and they never do.

But I'm quite happy to accept that City would have scored at least three even if Mane hadn't been sent off. They were getting everything right (which is a long way from guaranteed for city) while liverpool were getting everything (at the back) wrong. It was one of those games.

But also ... if Mane hadn't been sent off, I can see Liverpool scoring at least once - which  might have helped paper over some of the bad at the back.  And - you never know - Liverpool might have got more and made a game of it.

But whatever, to me, with hindsight, that looks like it was going to be City's day whatever. 

Your own club would suffer the same now and then if you had a manager who tried to play football instead of boreball. It only happens to the teams that do try to play.

[jyoung]