New LoTG - Injuries - Liking it!!

[DavidObs]

I'm pleased for you. But I'm more interested in my customers

I fully appreciate they (my customers) are to blame (especially their goalkeepers), but I still like my customers (I'm in the minority) despite their wrongdoing and the unfairness they've brought upon themselves; which I'm not comfortable with. Not much point debating it further than that. It hasn't worked well in the games I've duelled on... maybe we've been disproportionately unfortunate in our games with the frequency of unrest, but it doesn't seem to be a respected change on TV either (although I don't watch as much as most)

Though surely Big Cat, your customers are not just the players, but the (paying) spectators?

 

[RustyRef]

Though surely Big Cat, your customers are not just the players, but the (paying) spectators?

And that is where I'm coming from, the law changes have made it vastly better for spectators. Players may not like it, but it is them that caused the law change in the first place.

 

[Big Cat]

Though surely Big Cat, your customers are not just the players, but the (paying) spectators?

Yes, I see where you're coming from with regards to 'neutral spectators'
Don't think the same applies to 'fans'

Still fairly early days, we'll see how it goes

 

[wazztie16]

In the Derby match earlier, one of the players went down after having the ball smashed at their head, not close range but there was some power in the hit. Referee stopped play in a neutral area, went over to him, and the player got back up, and as far as I saw, the player stayed on the pitch, not needing treatment.

I felt that was a good way of doing things, whether it was right or not is another matter but I felt it was fair in the situation.

 

[DavidObs]

In the Derby match earlier, one of the players went down after having the ball smashed at their head, not close range but there was some power in the hit. Referee stopped play in a neutral area, went over to him, and the player got back up, and as far as I saw, the player stayed on the pitch, not needing treatment.

I felt that was a good way of doing things, whether it was right or not is another matter but I felt it was fair in the situation.

I can understand that, though do you know whether it occurred before or after Derby had scored their 2nd goal? I don’t think it matters because it was a clear injury (not that the Laws determines whether it’s a clear injury or not for delay in the re-start), but even more understandable if Derby were losing or drawing since they would not want to be delaying any re-start.

 

[wazztie16]

I can understand that, though do you know whether it occurred before or after Derby had scored their 2nd goal? I don’t think it matters because it was a clear injury (not that the Laws determines whether it’s a clear injury or not for delay in the re-start), but even more understandable if Derby were losing or drawing since they would not want to be delaying any re-start.

I'm sure it was in the second half, and Derby scored their first 2 early in the half.