World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

[Jimjamesak]

You just wanted to kill 11. So it seems like this is self solving without a change.

*shrug* Gotta crack a few eggs if you want an omelette.

80 was a good number to choose and I’m sure there’s more than 11 clubs that can’t even reach the stadium and organizational level of Bournemouth.

But even just dividing up the 92 clubs in the PL and EFL wouldn’t be hard, just be more games. And it wouldn’t be anything new. Contrary to popular belief, automatic promotion into the then Fourth Division from the fifth tier National Conference wasn’t instituted until 1986, back then you had to be “elected” to be promoted. Even nowadays there’s only two teams that are promoted between League Two and the National League.

Most of the clubs League Two and below are pretty mediocre and really aren’t anywhere close to even most League One teams.

(And yes I know Fulham was a fourth tier club. For all of three seasons. And they were in the third tier by the time Al-Fayed bought them)

[MissThundercat]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

Newcastle plays Man U today. Wonder how bad the Magpies will get beat?

[MissThundercat]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

mookie, that was terrible.

[mookie1995]

mookie, that was terrible.

Been a bad week

[MissThundercat]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

Yesterday afternoon, I caught the first half of Arsenal vs. Manchester United, and I had no idea who to root for. However, I noticed that Arsenal was in control of that match for the first half...

[Jimjamesak]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

Soccer Media folks around the world: "The handling rules are not clear enough! We need to clearly define handball rules!"

IFAB: *clearly defines handball rules*

Soccer Media folks around the world after goals are disallowed for violating the clearly defined rules they asked for: "These rules are ridiculous!"

[Kepler]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

Soccer Media folks around the world: "The handling rules are not clear enough! We need to clearly define handball rules!"

IFAB: *clearly defines handball rules*

Soccer Media folks around the world after goals are disallowed for violating the clearly defined rules they asked for: "These rules are ridiculous!"

LOL. This is every officiating change ever. How long did the media whine for VAR? Now many microseconds will it take for ESPN to turn against robot umps?

[Kepler]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

Yesterday afternoon, I caught the first half of Arsenal vs. Manchester United, and I had no idea who to root for. However, I noticed that Arsenal was in control of that match for the first half...

That's easy. Always f-ck the Red Devils.

Q: What's the difference between a plane crash and a cow?

A: Manchester United haven't spent the last 58 years milking a cow.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

Soccer Media folks around the world: "The handling rules are not clear enough! We need to clearly define handball rules!"

IFAB: *clearly defines handball rules*

Soccer Media folks around the world after goals are disallowed for violating the clearly defined rules they asked for: "These rules are ridiculous!"

Some of the changes are dumb and create some additional and unnecessary ambiguity. But it also clears up others. I like the change where the arm above the shoulder is always a handball. I've always told people, as long as the arms are uncontrolled, I'm not going to call it. So keep your arms tight and you're fine. Move your arms into the ball and I'll call it every time.

I'm not sure I like this:
a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm
and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity

Call it within the spirit and the context. It's not necessary to add these extra "Yeahbuts"

I really like this one though:
If the goalkeeper attempts to ‘clear’ (release into play) a throw-in or deliberate
kick from a team-mate but the ‘clearance’ fails, the goalkeeper can then handle
the ball

Sometimes you just botch a clearance. Can you handle it? Can you not? Glad they cleared this up explicitly.

The goalkeeper must have at least part of one foot on/in line with the goal line
when the kick is taken; cannot stand behind the line

Dumb, utterly dumb.

A player who is being substituted must leave the field by the nearest point on the
touchline/goal line (unless the referee indicates the player can leave quickly/
immediately at the halfway line or a different point because of safety, injury etc.)

THANK GOD

Generally speaking, the rules changes are good this year. Shocking.

[Kepler]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

The goalkeeper must have at least part of one foot on/in line with the goal line
when the kick is taken; cannot stand behind the line

Dumb, utterly dumb.

What do you think they are trying to get at with this? I agree it seems bizarre.

I read around a bit and the community seems mystified as well. My favorite is: "the best way to ensure the goal keep is not in front of the line is to have a foot on the line." Because I guess we've given up on spatial reasoning? Or maybe this is anticipating soccer played on the surface of a Klein bottle where "inside" and "outside" are problematic terms.

[RaceBoarder]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

What do you think they are trying to get at with this? I agree it seems bizarre.

I read around a bit and the community seems mystified as well. My favorite is: "the best way to ensure the goal keep is not in front of the line is to have a foot on the line." Because I guess we've given up on spatial reasoning? Or maybe this is anticipating soccer played on the surface of a Klein bottle where "inside" and "outside" are problematic terms.

You sometimes see rule wording done specifically to try and leave no grey area. In doing so, it's easy to lose sight of the advantage/disadvantage view.

My only thought is that they are trying to prevent momentum going towards the ball at the moment of the kick? That can be a slight advantage I guess.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

You sometimes see rule wording done specifically to try and leave no grey area. In doing so, it's easy to lose sight of the advantage/disadvantage view.

My only thought is that they are trying to prevent momentum going towards the ball at the moment of the kick? That can be a slight advantage I guess.

I would always go behind the line because some d-ckhead ref always has to show CoRec 35+ soccer goalie that "He's the boss!!!!!!" and call me for leaving the line early. Which I don't do.

I say everything in the goal is on the field. It's not like leaving the field off the touchlines where it LOOKS like you're not an active player. You're in the farking goal.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

What do you think they are trying to get at with this? I agree it seems bizarre.

I read around a bit and the community seems mystified as well. My favorite is: "the best way to ensure the goal keep is not in front of the line is to have a foot on the line." Because I guess we've given up on spatial reasoning? Or maybe this is anticipating soccer played on the surface of a Klein bottle where "inside" and "outside" are problematic terms.

I honestly have no idea. I don't think it offers that much of an advantage if the goalie were to be essentially touching the back of the net and come crashing out by trying to time it perfectly with the kicker. All the kicker has to do is stutter step and all of a sudden the goalie is past the line. There's zero chance the goalie gets an advantage there.

I remember that we've also had the conversation that if a goalie were something like a foot in front of the line, the percentage of "blockable area" was increased almost negligibly. So this whole thing is just a bizarre new rule.

[Jimjamesak]

I honestly have no idea. I don't think it offers that much of an advantage if the goalie were to be essentially touching the back of the net and come crashing out by trying to time it perfectly with the kicker. All the kicker has to do is stutter step and all of a sudden the goalie is past the line. There's zero chance the goalie gets an advantage there.

I remember that we've also had the conversation that if a goalie were something like a foot in front of the line, the percentage of "blockable area" was increased almost negligibly. So this whole thing is just a bizarre new rule.

It’s to prevent gamesmanship by the goalkeeper, same reason that now the posts and crossbar can’t be moving as well (or why the goalkeeper has to be facing forward).

Remember, the LOTG are largely written for the professional level, and at that level this little trivial, negligible stuff really matters.

[Jimjamesak]

Re: World Soccer XXX: We Have Men Too!

Also, the IFAB has a really nice PDF presentation explaining the Law changes with video examples.