***Official Soccer Discussion Thread*** (1 Viewer)

[B Maverick]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

 

[titusbramble]

As an aside the BBC can go **** themselves for moving our FA Cup game to a ridiculous time so they can televise our match on a Thursday evening. In Welsh.

 

[El Floppo]

As an aside the BBC can go **** themselves for moving our FA Cup game to a ridiculous time so they can televise our match on a Thursday evening. In Welsh.

ewch **** eich hun BBC

 

[titusbramble]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

 

[El Floppo]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

4 steps was after the no back pass.

 

[NewlyRetired]

It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game)

That was the US vs Canada game in the semi finals of the Olympics.

US was trailing 3-2 at the time of the call. The Canadians were doing everything they could to kill the game off and for one extremely rare occurrence, the ref said "enough is enough".

Like you, I can't ever remember it being called before or even after that time no matter how egregious the keepers act knowing the refs are not going to call it.

 

[titusbramble]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

4 steps was after the no back pass.

Yeah I'm not saying that they came into force at the same time, more that as a born in the early 80s bloke I can remember it being a law but also remember it being eliminated at around the same time as the back pass rule radically changing (for the better, I should add, huge chunks of Italia 90 were unwatchable), and as such it seemed like a limitation of time as opposed to movement would improve the game - which it should, assuming the new rule was enforced. Which it's never really been

 

[titusbramble]

It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game)

That was the US vs Canada game in the semi finals of the Olympics.

US was trailing 3-2 at the time of the call. The Canadians were doing everything they could to kill the game off and for one extremely rare occurrence, the ref said "enough is enough".

Like you, I can't ever remember it being called before or even after that time no matter how egregious the keepers act knowing the refs are not going to call it.

Thank you, I had some recollection that it involved the USWNT but for some reason thought it was in a World Cup and against Japan

 

[B Maverick]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

4 steps was after the no back pass.

Yeah I'm not saying that they came into force at the same time, more that as a born in the early 80s bloke I can remember it being a law but also remember it being eliminated at around the same time as the back pass rule radically changing (for the better, I should add, huge chunks of Italia 90 were unwatchable), and as such it seemed like a limitation of time as opposed to movement would improve the game - which it should, assuming the new rule was enforced. Which it's never really been

The pass back rule change was one of the few that has turned out to be a success. Denmark and Schmeichel really used to exploit that.
I also remember the 4 steps for a keeper. Given them freedom to roam the box was a good choice and opened the game a bit. Seems now the players have exploited that and the refs not wanting to call time wasting.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

4 steps was after the no back pass.

Yeah I'm not saying that they came into force at the same time, more that as a born in the early 80s bloke I can remember it being a law but also remember it being eliminated at around the same time as the back pass rule radically changing (for the better, I should add, huge chunks of Italia 90 were unwatchable), and as such it seemed like a limitation of time as opposed to movement would improve the game - which it should, assuming the new rule was enforced. Which it's never really been

The pass back rule change was one of the few that has turned out to be a success. Denmark and Schmeichel really used to exploit that.
I also remember the 4 steps for a keeper. Given them freedom to roam the box was a good choice and opened the game a bit. Seems now the players have exploited that and the refs not wanting to call time wasting.

I love the unlimited movement for keepers. Some of the most exciting plays for me is when a keeper quickly starts a counter attack.

 

[El Floppo]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

4 steps was after the no back pass.

Yeah I'm not saying that they came into force at the same time, more that as a born in the early 80s bloke I can remember it being a law but also remember it being eliminated at around the same time as the back pass rule radically changing (for the better, I should add, huge chunks of Italia 90 were unwatchable), and as such it seemed like a limitation of time as opposed to movement would improve the game - which it should, assuming the new rule was enforced. Which it's never really been

The pass back rule change was one of the few that has turned out to be a success. Denmark and Schmeichel really used to exploit that.
I also remember the 4 steps for a keeper. Given them freedom to roam the box was a good choice and opened the game a bit. Seems now the players have exploited that and the refs not wanting to call time wasting.

I love the unlimited movement for keepers. Some of the most exciting plays for me is when a keeper quickly starts a counter attack.

I feel like I was 10 or 11 when the no pass back rule went into effect. I was playing GK for a half (back in those days) and I was called for picking the ball up... I had no idea wtf was going on and was pissed about it.... especially because most of the refs back then didn't really know the rules anyways (I had a ref make me move out of the center circle... on our own kick off).

 

[NewlyRetired]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

4 steps was after the no back pass.

Yeah I'm not saying that they came into force at the same time, more that as a born in the early 80s bloke I can remember it being a law but also remember it being eliminated at around the same time as the back pass rule radically changing (for the better, I should add, huge chunks of Italia 90 were unwatchable), and as such it seemed like a limitation of time as opposed to movement would improve the game - which it should, assuming the new rule was enforced. Which it's never really been

The pass back rule change was one of the few that has turned out to be a success. Denmark and Schmeichel really used to exploit that.
I also remember the 4 steps for a keeper. Given them freedom to roam the box was a good choice and opened the game a bit. Seems now the players have exploited that and the refs not wanting to call time wasting.

I love the unlimited movement for keepers. Some of the most exciting plays for me is when a keeper quickly starts a counter attack.

I feel like I was 10 or 11 when the no pass back rule went into effect. I was playing GK for a half (back in those days) and I was called for picking the ball up... I had no idea wtf was going on and was pissed about it.... especially because most of the refs back then didn't really know the rules anyways (I had a ref make me move out of the center circle... on our own kick off).

The timeline seems off. The back pass rule was 1992. You were only 10 in 1992?

 

[El Floppo]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

4 steps was after the no back pass.

Yeah I'm not saying that they came into force at the same time, more that as a born in the early 80s bloke I can remember it being a law but also remember it being eliminated at around the same time as the back pass rule radically changing (for the better, I should add, huge chunks of Italia 90 were unwatchable), and as such it seemed like a limitation of time as opposed to movement would improve the game - which it should, assuming the new rule was enforced. Which it's never really been

The pass back rule change was one of the few that has turned out to be a success. Denmark and Schmeichel really used to exploit that.
I also remember the 4 steps for a keeper. Given them freedom to roam the box was a good choice and opened the game a bit. Seems now the players have exploited that and the refs not wanting to call time wasting.

I love the unlimited movement for keepers. Some of the most exciting plays for me is when a keeper quickly starts a counter attack.

I feel like I was 10 or 11 when the no pass back rule went into effect. I was playing GK for a half (back in those days) and I was called for picking the ball up... I had no idea wtf was going on and was pissed about it.... especially because most of the refs back then didn't really know the rules anyways (I had a ref make me move out of the center circle... on our own kick off).

The timeline seems off. The back pass rule was 1992. You were only 10 in 1992?

this was still the 70s.

hmm.... I have vivid memory of it, the field and team even. 90s would've been my semi-pro days, not my 12u days

 

[NewlyRetired]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

4 steps was after the no back pass.

Yeah I'm not saying that they came into force at the same time, more that as a born in the early 80s bloke I can remember it being a law but also remember it being eliminated at around the same time as the back pass rule radically changing (for the better, I should add, huge chunks of Italia 90 were unwatchable), and as such it seemed like a limitation of time as opposed to movement would improve the game - which it should, assuming the new rule was enforced. Which it's never really been

The pass back rule change was one of the few that has turned out to be a success. Denmark and Schmeichel really used to exploit that.
I also remember the 4 steps for a keeper. Given them freedom to roam the box was a good choice and opened the game a bit. Seems now the players have exploited that and the refs not wanting to call time wasting.

I love the unlimited movement for keepers. Some of the most exciting plays for me is when a keeper quickly starts a counter attack.

I feel like I was 10 or 11 when the no pass back rule went into effect. I was playing GK for a half (back in those days) and I was called for picking the ball up... I had no idea wtf was going on and was pissed about it.... especially because most of the refs back then didn't really know the rules anyways (I had a ref make me move out of the center circle... on our own kick off).

The timeline seems off. The back pass rule was 1992. You were only 10 in 1992?

this was still the 70s.

hmm.... I have vivid memory of it, the field and team even. 90s would've been my semi-pro days, not my 12u days

I have no idea what back pass rule you are referring to in the 70’s. Was there a rule change at that time?

 

[B Maverick]

The rule changed in 1992 after Denmark's Euro title.

I started playing in 1980 so can't help with any 70s rules

 

[El Floppo]

Seems like a whole bunch of pointless crap, just actually enforce the laws as they are and there is no problem

Exactly. It's not like it's a new situation without regulation. They never actually enforced the rule in the first place, so let's try that first before trying something else.

I've been saying for years- as soon as the GK has the ball it should look like a basketball game after inbounding the ball after a bucket with the 10 second back court rule. Ref counts visibly on his fingers so everybody know what's what. 6 seconds later, either the ball is gone or the whistle blows. In the US for college and HS, fans will sometimes scream the count if the other team is bad about it.

I've agreed for years. You want more action and less time wasting, call what's on the books. But I am open to making the laws more meaningful and make sense.

I have never understood why Refs won't call things that are clearly in the rules.

The only reason I am in favor of rule changes is because the refs seem far more likely to call a new rule change than they are a rule that has effectively been removed by the referees over the years.

It seems far easier for a ref to adjudicate a new rule than admit they have been ignoring a rule for a long long time.

But, without wanting to go on an off-topic diatribe, that is how you get rulebooks that are so thick you could bludgeon a whale to death with them. It's never really been called (the only one I can remember was in a fairly high profile women's international game) because it only came into effect when they eliminated how far a keeper can run with the ball in hand, round about the same time they implemented the back pass rule

4 steps was after the no back pass.

Yeah I'm not saying that they came into force at the same time, more that as a born in the early 80s bloke I can remember it being a law but also remember it being eliminated at around the same time as the back pass rule radically changing (for the better, I should add, huge chunks of Italia 90 were unwatchable), and as such it seemed like a limitation of time as opposed to movement would improve the game - which it should, assuming the new rule was enforced. Which it's never really been

The pass back rule change was one of the few that has turned out to be a success. Denmark and Schmeichel really used to exploit that.
I also remember the 4 steps for a keeper. Given them freedom to roam the box was a good choice and opened the game a bit. Seems now the players have exploited that and the refs not wanting to call time wasting.

I love the unlimited movement for keepers. Some of the most exciting plays for me is when a keeper quickly starts a counter attack.

I feel like I was 10 or 11 when the no pass back rule went into effect. I was playing GK for a half (back in those days) and I was called for picking the ball up... I had no idea wtf was going on and was pissed about it.... especially because most of the refs back then didn't really know the rules anyways (I had a ref make me move out of the center circle... on our own kick off).

The timeline seems off. The back pass rule was 1992. You were only 10 in 1992?

this was still the 70s.

hmm.... I have vivid memory of it, the field and team even. 90s would've been my semi-pro days, not my 12u days

I have no idea what back pass rule you are referring to in the 70’s. Was there a rule change at that time?

oh.... not the back pass!
you used to be able to pick the ball back up as a GK- THAT'S the rule change back then.

 

[El Floppo]

The rule changed in 1992 after Denmark's Euro title.

I started playing in 1980 so can't help with any 70s rules

shut it, kid.

 

[B Maverick]

The rule changed in 1992 after Denmark's Euro title.

I started playing in 1980 so can't help with any 70s rules

shut it, kid.

Make me, Uncle Floppo!

I was 18 in 1992 and starting college.

 

[El Floppo]

The rule changed in 1992 after Denmark's Euro title.

I started playing in 1980 so can't help with any 70s rules

shut it, kid.

Make me, Uncle Floppo!

I was 18 in 1992 and starting college.

get off my lawn.

 

[B Maverick]

The rule changed in 1992 after Denmark's Euro title.

I started playing in 1980 so can't help with any 70s rules

shut it, kid.

Make me, Uncle Floppo!

I was 18 in 1992 and starting college.

get off my lawn.

Keep up with the conversation

 

[El Floppo]

The rule changed in 1992 after Denmark's Euro title.

I started playing in 1980 so can't help with any 70s rules

shut it, kid.

Make me, Uncle Floppo!

I was 18 in 1992 and starting college.

get off my lawn.

Keep up with the conversation

ok chat. brainrot. etc.

 

[B Maverick]

The rule changed in 1992 after Denmark's Euro title.

I started playing in 1980 so can't help with any 70s rules

shut it, kid.

Make me, Uncle Floppo!

I was 18 in 1992 and starting college.

get off my lawn.

Keep up with the conversation

ok chat. brainrot. etc.

laughing emoji

 

[El Floppo]

oh.... not the back pass!
you used to be able to pick the ball back up as a GK- THAT'S the rule change back then.

feel like this was lost in the whippersnapper chat.

you used to be able to have the ball in your hands, roll or kick it on the ground and then pick it back up.

seems so, so dumb to have been able to have done that of course, we were also still playing a 2-3-5, so ymmv.

 

[NewlyRetired]

So this is officially out of the rumor stage.

====================

Backheeled‬ ‪@backheeled.com‬


MLS is "considering more than ever" a change to a fall-to-spring calendar that would mirror the world's top leagues, Don Garber said.

The commissioner also confirmed MLS will play in the 2025 U.S. Open Cup, in some form.

 

[titusbramble]

Utter nonsense that the Merseyside derby has been postponed. It's not even that windy

 

[CletiusMaximus]

The rule changed in 1992 after Denmark's Euro title.

I started playing in 1980 so can't help with any 70s rules

I think the rule change had already been announced prior to the final, and Denmark seemed to want to make history by abusing the old rule as much as possible before it changed.

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

youtu.be

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Pep's legacy as someone who cracked the code on how to win when you have the best team money can buy, but would never in a million years be able to "take his'n and beat your'n, and then take your'n and beat his'n" is being fully cemented this year.

 

[McBokonon]

Dan Ashworth being let go at ManU after the whole gardening leave drama with Newcastle is pretty funny, to me anyway.

 

[B Maverick]

Dan Ashworth being let go at ManU after the whole gardening leave drama with Newcastle is pretty funny, to me anyway.

Yeah INEOS seems to have bought into the circus and helped it continue.
Reportedly it was Ashworth who wanted to keep ETH into this season. And then he was afraid of how a move to a 3-4-3 would affect his recruiting ability...

But his fireable offense was that he wanted Southgate to replace ETH.

 

[gianmarco]

Sunday league in a nutshell

 

[B Maverick]

PGMOL has fired ref Coote for his disparaging remarks against Klopp.

 

[B Maverick]

Sunday league in a nutshell

Sunday league has so much fun to it...

So this past weekend we were supposed to play a semi-final in our Sunday League playoffs. The other team did not show.
1) They split the league into 2 brackets. Good teams in their bracket, less good teams in their own. We were top of the less good teams.
2) We thought there were no more games after the loss before Thanksgiving (quarterfinals), as most teams who lost thought.
3) Coach happens to check the schedule, sees we have a game and lets everyone know. Losers Losers bracket??
4) Show up, no other team shows. Call commish. He's confused.
5) Turns out he didn't tell anyone, our manager happened to look, the other didnt.
6) Also, the other manager called to see if there were any friendlies, commish tells them no since this isn't really a "friendly" and he thought they were asking about next week since there was a game scheduled this week.
7) Commish plays on the o55s and his team plays after ours. The refs and other team were told 1025 game time. He tells his team 1045.

He caused a complete mess.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

PGMOL has fired ref Coote for his disparaging remarks against Klopp.

I don't think the Klopp criticism is what did him in. I've not yet read up on it but it doesn't seem to be a problem for refs to be critical of obnoxious former managers who are no longer in the league. Coote's problem imo was the cocaine use and negative comments about the Liverpool club in general.

 

[El Floppo]

Coote's problem imo was the cocaine use and negative comments about the Liverpool club in general.

so that's a problem these days?

 

[B Maverick]

PGMOL has fired ref Coote for his disparaging remarks against Klopp.

I don't think the Klopp criticism is what did him in. I've not yet read up on it but it doesn't seem to be a problem for refs to be critical of obnoxious former managers who are no longer in the league. Coote's problem imo was the cocaine use and negative comments about the Liverpool club in general.

The article I read said it was for the remarks against Klopp. I figured it would be more the cocaine too but maybe they need it to keep up with the match?

 

[NewlyRetired]

https://x.com/FabrizioRomano
Fabrizio Romano

@FabrizioRomano

OFFICIAL: Spain, Portugal and Morocco will host the centenary edition of the World Cup in 2030.

Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay will also be 'centenary hosts'.

 

[NewlyRetired]

well this is quite odd. I can't imagine SI has any where near the money that would be required to offset the advertising from just keeping the free Red Bull name on the stadium

====================================

https://x.com/tombogert
Tom Bogert

@tombogert

The home of the New York Red Bulls has a new name: Sports Illustrated Stadium.The club announced the home stadium is no longer "Red Bull Arena" and will now be called "Sports Illustrated Stadium"

 

[B Maverick]

https://x.com/FabrizioRomano
Fabrizio Romano
@FabrizioRomano

OFFICIAL: Spain, Portugal and Morocco will host the centenary edition of the World Cup in 2030.

Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay will also be 'centenary hosts'.

Alright everyone, lets plan a meet up in 2030!!!


And then boycott in 2034 when it is in Saudi and probably moved to the winter.

 

[B Maverick]

https://x.com/FabrizioRomano
Fabrizio Romano
@FabrizioRomano

OFFICIAL: Spain, Portugal and Morocco will host the centenary edition of the World Cup in 2030.

Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay will also be 'centenary hosts'.

So it appears that there will be a game in each of the SA countries to commemorate the 100th anniversary.

Seems an unnecessary burden to add to players who then have to fly to SA and back for a single game.

 

[NewlyRetired]

https://x.com/FabrizioRomano
Fabrizio Romano
@FabrizioRomano

OFFICIAL: Spain, Portugal and Morocco will host the centenary edition of the World Cup in 2030.

Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay will also be 'centenary hosts'.

So it appears that there will be a game in each of the SA countries to commemorate the 100th anniversary.

Seems an unnecessary burden to add to players who then have to fly to SA and back for a single game.

My guess is that all 6 teams will set up initial camp in South America. That way they won't have any added travel close to the first game as they will have likely been there for a month or so.

But there is no getting around having to fly for the second game to the main countries for those 6 teams. I wonder if the organizers will give 1 extra day for these 6 teams between games 1 and 2

 

[B Maverick]

https://x.com/FabrizioRomano
Fabrizio Romano
@FabrizioRomano

OFFICIAL: Spain, Portugal and Morocco will host the centenary edition of the World Cup in 2030.

Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay will also be 'centenary hosts'.

So it appears that there will be a game in each of the SA countries to commemorate the 100th anniversary.

Seems an unnecessary burden to add to players who then have to fly to SA and back for a single game.

My guess is that all 6 teams will set up initial camp in South America. That way they won't have any added travel close to the first game as they will have likely been there for a month or so.

But there is no getting around having to fly for the second game to the main countries for those 6 teams. I wonder if the organizers will give 1 extra day for these 6 teams between games 1 and 2

Yup, nothing like an 12 hour flight after match one of the WC to help you get ready for match 2!

I guess if they are grouped together that might help.

 

[B Maverick]

OK EVERYONE SAVE YOUR MONEY SO WE CAN HAVE A FBG SOCCER CHAT MEETUP IN 2030!!

 

[titusbramble]

That would be cheaper than USA 26 ngl

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

On a scale from "I'm Out" to "I'm Rapturing As I Sit" where does this image rate for you?

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

@WestHamPlace
When I said I wanted West Ham to be competing with Man City, this isn’t what I meant.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

On a scale from "I'm Out" to "I'm Rapturing As I Sit" where does this image rate for you?

The image leaves out City's 3-0 win against Forrest but this run is unbelievable, uncanny. Think of the pressure on Man United this weekend - you really have to expect at least a point at the Etihad under these circumstances. I'm so excited to finally get a look at the table in a couple weeks on Boxing Day.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Sunday league in a nutshell

Concacaf teams from all over want to hire that grounds keeper

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Also maybe says something about Rodri as compared to DeBruyne in this team. KDB missed something like 30 games last season and they hardly skipped a beat.

 

[B Maverick]

On a scale from "I'm Out" to "I'm Rapturing As I Sit" where does this image rate for you?

The image leaves out City's 3-0 win against Forrest but this run is unbelievable, uncanny. Think of the pressure on Man United this weekend - you really have to expect at least a point at the Etihad under these circumstances. I'm so excited to finally get a look at the table in a couple weeks on Boxing Day.

Nothing like a derby vs United to help cure what ails you