: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:00 pm  

keithcun wrote:

Please, please tell me someone has hacked your account to make you look stupid.

Well, nice counter argument. Very intelligent.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:01 pm  

keithcun wrote:

Please, please tell me someone has hacked your account to make you look stupid.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:02 pm  

OrdsallRed wrote:

What I would think about is trying to bring in a rule that says when Giggs (for example) is fouled and the ref gives United the free kick, then Giggs doesnt have to go off after receiving treatment...why should the team that has been sinned against have a disadvantage at the ensuing free-kick??? I know its pretty much the same as it always used to be but it wasnt that bad was it???

That's the thing that pi$$es me off as well.

Walking off the pitch to come back on again seems like a pointless waste of time and effort, and as you say the player's team is disadvantaged.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:05 pm  

OrdsallRed wrote:

I can understand where you're coming from but cant see how it would work...what if 2 players from the same team clash heads then that team would be down to 9 men for 5 minutes through no real fault of their own.

What I would think about is trying to bring in a rule that says when Giggs (for example) is fouled and the ref gives United the free kick, then Giggs doesnt have to go off after receiving treatment...why should the team that has been sinned against have a disadvantage at the ensuing free-kick??? I know its pretty much the same as it always used to be but it wasnt that bad was it???

Nemanja wrote:

That's the thing that pi$$es me off as well.

Walking off the pitch to come back on again seems like a pointless waste of time and effort, and as you say the player's team is disadvantaged.

See, Saint Billy, someone came along to show you the errors of your point. Me, I just thought I'd have a laugh at your expense, because to be brutally honest, if you hadn't even thought of that, you deserve everything you get.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:06 pm  

OrdsallRed wrote:

I can understand where you're coming from but cant see how it would work...what if 2 players from the same team clash heads then that team would be down to 9 men for 5 minutes through no real fault of their own.

What I would think about is trying to bring in a rule that says when Giggs (for example) is fouled and the ref gives United the free kick, then Giggs doesnt have to go off after receiving treatment...why should the team that has been sinned against have a disadvantage at the ensuing free-kick??? I know its pretty much the same as it always used to be but it wasnt that bad was it???

It's just when a player goes down to stop the game on purpose, then jumps up straight away, it really winds me up. Obviously if the player has been fouled and is genuinely hurt, then he will either have to go off for treatment anyway, or he will be staying down to make it seem worse to try and get people booked or sent off. If he is genuinely hurt then chances are he will need the treatment in that 5 minute spell.

I do understand that if two players of the same team bang heads, then they may need treatment, maybe the officials could judge the situation and if they feel that the player is not actually hurt, then they could have the option to make them go off for the 5 minutes, rather than making a rule that says they must go off. Its the referee's opinion.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:09 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

You reckon?

For the period of the sin-binning the team affected would just throw 10 men behind the ball and you'd have a five minute game of attack and defence. If a player needs to commit a cynical foul he'll still commit it in the knowledge that his team will shut up shop while he's off and hopefully hang on until he comes back.

Thing is, some teams do that anyway. I Think the introduction of the sin bin would mean that teams would try not to foul as much, as they will be without a player for 10 minutes.

It will take some getting used to in the game but I think it could work TBH

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:09 pm  

keithcun wrote:

See, Saint Billy, someone came along to show you the errors of your point. Me, I just thought I'd have a laugh at your expense, because to be brutally honest, if you hadn't even thought of that, you deserve everything you get.

I did think of it. It's something that really winds me up and would like to see a way of it being stopped, hence me starting a bit of discussion on it.

If that's what you get your laughs from, then to be brutally honest, you need a life.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:11 pm  

Then you could end up with officials trying to ascertain whether a player is injured/hurt or not...in this litigious times that will never ever happen.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:13 pm  

OrdsallRed wrote:

Then you could end up with officials trying to ascertain whether a player is injured/hurt or not...in this litigious times that will never ever happen.

I think its pretty obvious 9 times out of 10, wether a player is injured or wether he is going down for the sake of it. Anyway, what i'm trying to say is that it winds me up and needs sorting.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:15 pm  

OrdsallRed wrote:

Then you could end up with officials trying to ascertain whether a player is injured/hurt or not...in this litigious times that will never ever happen.

If it is Ronaldo or Drogba leave for 10 minutes and see if they get up. If not they might broke a nail.