Search results

Take it from someone who watches a league with VAR. Nothing is fixed by having it. This(these) incidents are a case in point. Ask 10 blokes for their opinions and you'll get a 50 / 50 split on the what it should have been. VAR is an abortion and a blight on the game only invented to fill the...

............

Nevermind......

Search for the IFAB feed on twitter and you can see this crap is here to stay unfortunately. https://twitter.com/theifab?lang=en

Just a few of dozens I could have put up. https://www.foxsports.com.au/football/a-league/live-newcastle-jets-host-adelaide-united-in-a-crucial-topfour-clash-at-mcdonald-jones-stadium/news-story/779e55cc0702d80560a126eecf5a24db...

Now I've read it all. (As in all the posts in this read, not as an insult.) 1000% agree with absolutely everything above this. (Apart from the comp being rigged. I think that's a huge overstatement.) Anyone who thinks VAR is the answer need only spend a few weekends watching football here...

Haven't read everything above , I will do though, but just let me say the VAR is an abortion of a system that is systematically ruining football here in Australia where they are trialing it. It's a joke, a farce and any other descriptor you'd like to use. The role is ill-defined, it's guilty...

Fair enough. Will take this on board.

Does the pre-match talk constitute a 'first' warning for everything then? IE. The first 'whatever' once the game starts is a sanction because you've already had words?

You may well be right but I'm taking the yellow for dissent option here.

^^^ I'm talking about the big two here. 'F#$k' and the other one.

Warning, then a yellow. I start each game with a warning that there are kids and ladies about and if there's any loud swearing that Mrs Brown in the street across the park can hear I'm going to probably have to deal with it. Under your breath is OK but anything OTT then I'll take action...

Yellow.

Yeah probably. Only 2 more weeks before you blokes get a hiding. Mind you they went alright yesterday. http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/ashes-tour-game-cricket-australia-xi-v-england-alastair-cook-fails-again-20171108-gzh9b9.html

but if a player takes a free kick quickly and an opponent who is less than 9.15 m (10 yds) from the ball intercepts it, the referee allows play to continue Forgetting about the above clip for a minute and not to split hairs but wouldn't the line above allow you to stick your foot out at it...

Cheers as usual. Thumbs up.jpg

I think the ambiguity is what defines an 'intercept'. Surely if he goes to take it quickly and kicks it just by you you're entitled to stick your boot out? But in this case he stands still for a moment, pauses, decides to retreat, then realises the quick free kick is on so takes a step towards...

Not sure if these are geoblocked so posting two links. https://twitter.com/ALeague/status/927472946838249472 http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/video/1089310275855/Mitch-Austin-receives-shock-red-card Bit of an argument here as to what some see as 'deliberately' and some see as 'intercepting'...

^^^ This is an argument some are making over here. Have actually blown up a similar tackle against a player who completely flattened the opposing player after winning the ball. (More front on though.) Caused a huge ruckus at the time but after the game the player who I sanctioned apologised...

Is the above video geo-blocked? If so can you let me know and I'll try and find another source. Other source. https://twitter.com/FOXFOOTBALL/status/900312629096333312