Football 17/18

[The Nal]

Palace were by far the better team yesterday and could've scored a right few on another day. They have Saints, City, Utd and Chelsea as their next 4 games though.

[mrtourette]

You have to wonder what Palace were expecting - coming out and making  grand statement about changing the playing style (again), appointing someone with limited (if any) alternatives to the desired style and then giving him a team wholly unsuitable to playing that style with little time or money to implement what they wanted. Also complaining that De Boer wasn't exactly approachable when discussing the failings and lacked the interpersonal skills to get a resistant squad to buy into a completely different way or working - no shit. Did they actually know who they had employed? De Boer is not a great manager but you have to look at Steve Parish and the club and wonder if he/they had any idea what they were doing. The performance against Burnley was greatly improved and they should have won, but what could the chairman do after he publicly suggested that De Boer would be sacked if they lost. Did a box of 'stupid pills for football club executives' destined for the London Stadium get delivered to the wrong place? And now what? After all the bluster in the summer about a long-term solution to play attacking football they'll go back to a fatherly old guy who makes the underachieving players feel wanted and plays safe defensive football. It may well be more successful and help them scrape out of the relegation zone, but if I was a Palace fan I'd have little hope for anything other than the same at best every season.

I hope they get punished for their stupidity and get relegated.

[sdvruxk]

Just me who thought Liverpool were the better team before the goal? And probably should've have scored if it were not for lacklustre final deliveries, Salah in particular.

Obviously the first goal showed how easy it can be to score against Liverpool but I still think they would've been in the game if it was 11v11 and would've scored.

[CRW5252]

13 hours ago, TheGayTent said:

Instinct I'd suggest. 

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

True. Due to current laws. Which are bollocks.

It's an instinct that he needs to train out of himself then. No need for it whatsoever.

I didn't suggest anyone died. I just think we should make the game safer for players where possible.

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, sdvruxk said:

Just me who thought Liverpool were the better team before the goal? And probably should've have scored if it were not for lacklustre final deliveries, Salah in particular.

they were the better team, maybe, but city were always going to find the holes when KdB and Mendy have their accurate boots on.

As for Salah, from his games so far it's pretty clear he needs 5+ chances to get a goal - which isn't really a problem because he's a player who'll make those chances.

[CRW5252]

5 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

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.

Agreed.

I don't think how rare it is relevant. It is clear to me that a boot to the face can cause a lot of damage. Lets not wait till a very serious injury happens to ban it. If we can attempt to reduce the amount it happens, why not?

I certainly think Mane will think twice when going into an aerial dual feet first now. Surely that means the red has done its job? 

 

[TheGayTent]

20 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

It's an instinct that he needs to train out of himself then. No need for it whatsoever.

Players need to train themselves out of their instinct for scoring goals?  

20 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

I didn't suggest anyone died. I just think we should make the game safer for players where possible.

Fine, except you haven't suggested anything that does make the game safer for players. You've just suggested we make the game worse as a spectacle by sending players off needlessly. 

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, TheGayTent said:

Fine, except you haven't suggested anything that does make the game safer for players.

in which case we might as well end all rules and sanctions - and laws in the wider public sphere - because those rules and sanctions don't cause any changes of behaviour.

Or perhaps your logic is more than slightly flawed?

[kaosmark2]

3 hours ago, WS_Jack_III said:

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

I'm pretty sure Shelvey will at some point, but hopefully staying on the bench yesterday will give him a reminder to actually perform. He's definitely one of our best 3 CMs, when he stays on the pitch.

[JSmurphy]

De Boer out, Hodgson In? Jeez. 

I notice I've climbed to 3rd in the eFests fantasy league 

[lost]

Interesting subject the debate between safety and entertainment in sport. Jeff Astle's family linked his death to heading the football. The stuff starting to come out regarding brain damage from american football, rugby and football. I could easily see these sports looking very different in 10 to 15 years time.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, CRW5252 said:

It's an instinct that he needs to train out of himself then. No need for it whatsoever.

I didn't suggest anyone died. I just think we should make the game safer for players where possible.

You could make football safer by banning tackles all together.

[The Nal]

10 minutes ago, lost said:

Interesting subject the debate between safety and entertainment in sport. Jeff Astle's family linked his death to heading the football. The stuff starting to come out regarding brain damage from american football, rugby and football. I could easily see these sports looking very different in 10 to 15 years time.

NFL and rugby yeah but not football. Astle was heading footballs back then then looked like and weighed the same as WW2 underwater mines. 

 

Not one for banning hard tackling in footie but certainly am for tackles when the boot is raised 5 foot in the air towards someones head. 

[WS_Jack_III]

34 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

I'm pretty sure Shelvey will at some point, but hopefully staying on the bench yesterday will give him a reminder to actually perform. He's definitely one of our best 3 CMs, when he stays on the pitch.

Playing with the u23s tonight apparently.

Edited September 11, 2017 by WS_Jack_III

[kaosmark2]

6 minutes ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Playing with the u23s tonight apparently.

Good. Make him force his way back into the team.

[lost]

7 minutes ago, The Nal said:

NFL and rugby yeah but not football. Astle was heading footballs back then then looked like and weighed the same as WW2 underwater mines. 

I think its coming to be honest. 

http://www.espn.co.uk/football/united-states/story/2707094/court-settlement-proposes-ban-for-heading-the-ball

One of the podcasts I listen to talks about this and the new research is basically even small blows to the head like this when you are younger leads to certain forms of brain damage 

[CRW5252]

5 hours ago, TheGayTent said:

Players need to train themselves out of their instinct for scoring goals?  

He kicked someone in the face, he didn't score or even get close. His instinct was to try to go feet first into an aerial dual. That is dangerous and should stop. 

5 hours ago, TheGayTent said:

Fine, except you haven't suggested anything that does make the game safer for players. You've just suggested we make the game worse as a spectacle by sending players off needlessly. 

See eFestivals post, I couldn't have put it better.

Edited September 11, 2017 by CRW5252

[CRW5252]

4 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

You could make football safer by banning tackles all together.

Seriously? You are comparing a fundamental part of the game (tackling) to a high boot that was needless. Stopping players going into aerial duals feet first will not have any effect (or very little) on the way the games played but it will make the game safer. Banning tackling would completely change the sport. 

[TheGayTent]

2 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

Banning tackling would completely change the sport. 

Whoosh ! 

[pink_triangle]

3 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

Seriously? You are comparing a fundamental part of the game (tackling) to a high boot that was needless. Stopping players going into aerial duals feet first will not have any effect (or very little) on the way the games played but it will make the game safer. Banning tackling would completely change the sport. 

Do you think the red card acts as a deterrent? I just don't believe many forwards in this situation are thinking of playing the ball and then decide not to go high for fear of a red card. If the forward thinks they can score, their natural instinct is to go for the goal. 

[LJS]

58 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Do you think the red card acts as a deterrent? I just don't believe many forwards in this situation are thinking of playing the ball and then decide not to go high for fear of a red card. If the forward thinks they can score, their natural instinct is to go for the goal. 

...and the "natural instinct" of many players making a tackle is to fly in studs up both feet off the ground just as the "natural instinct" of the player on the line with the goalie nowhere & the ball heading into the net is to stick an arm out. 

Maybe it is Suarez's "natural instinct" to bite  people.

There are plenty of example's where a player's "natural instincts" can get them sent off. Much as I like Mane & he is in my fantasy team and I don't much like Man City, it was a reckless challenge & deserved a red card.

 

 

 

[mjsell]

 

[thetime]

Surprised Liverpool are appealing the length of ban.

[eFestivals]

21 minutes ago, thetime said:

Surprised Liverpool are appealing the length of ban.

it's worth a go, I suppose.

I reckon it's unlikely to be increased because of a frivolous appeal, and there's maybe a small possibility it might get reduced.

 

 

[ThomThomDrum]

Loved this............