Any votes that the new Handball rule is an improvement to the 80s or any of the past??? I'll wait......
Postponing a game due to the temperature
- Thread starter zarathustra
- Start date
- Status
I have to agree that there are many on here that don't seem to accept that there may be an alternative viewpoint even if it is delivered lightheartedly........some of them even need to take a chill pill or two! (If the cap fits.....)
It frustrates me that the art of debate is quickly disappearing probably due to the advent of social media.....everything with younger people these days seems to be black or white....
I too am thinking of bailing from this forum.....we'll see how the season starts!
I'm sure plenty will agree with that statement @Sheffields Finest .....whereas, in reality they keep ****ing it up further and further.....bloody offinabus filter....its not a match!
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
I think the new handball law makes things overly complicated, and will result in more freekicks/penalties, and I don't think it is an improvement over the previous laws.
But it is the laws, and we don't get to choose what we apply and what we dont. So the choice is simple
1. Apply the law correctly, even though you don't like/agree with it.
2. Apply the law incorrectly because you don't like/agree with it.
3. Petition the FA to submit a law change request to IFAB to change the handball lAw back to what it was.
4. Stop refereeing because you don't like the handball law.
Anyway this thread was about whether a match can/should be postponed due to unusually high temperatures.
The general consesus is that there are temperatures where playing a match would be dangerous, although the FA haven't released official guidance.
I'll see if my RDO comes back with anything, he did say they used to have something for youth games.
But it is the laws, and we don't get to choose what we apply and what we dont. So the choice is simple
1. Apply the law correctly, even though you don't like/agree with it.
2. Apply the law incorrectly because you don't like/agree with it.
3. Petition the FA to submit a law change request to IFAB to change the handball lAw back to what it was.
4. Stop refereeing because you don't like the handball law.
Anyway this thread was about whether a match can/should be postponed due to unusually high temperatures.
The general consesus is that there are temperatures where playing a match would be dangerous, although the FA haven't released official guidance.
I'll see if my RDO comes back with anything, he did say they used to have something for youth games.
5. We can apply the law correctly whilst still complaining about the pigs ear they've made of what was an already badly worded law.
There's one we can all do @zarathustra. We don't really need to patronisingly suggest giving up the whistle because we don't like one if the laws. I WAS never liked the hand ball law before I didn't stop refereeing because of that!.
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
If you want to discuss the changes to the handball law why not start (another) thread about it?
In fairness, The reason people are dismissive of comparing past and present is because when discussing the LOTG and games we are refereeing, the past is entirely irrelevant
Think you'll find that's already been done to death..........
Not really.
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
Then why is it being discussed on a thread about whether you postpone a match due to extreme temperatures?
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
But it absolutely is irrelevant.
The only thing that matters is what is in the laws of the game now. Discussing old laws might be interesting, but it's pure academic and has no relevance to todays refereeing.
Justylove
RefChat Addict
First, on the temperature issue. You have to differentiate between the top level of the pro game and grass roots football.
At the pro game level, the players are professional athletes and during a game and are surrounded by a top medical team including qualified doctors, along with paramedics on site.
Compare this with your local grassroots game. How many times have you called a "trainer" on for it to be someone who waddles on with a bottle of water to squirt on the player, or if they are lucky a can of freeze spray?
Therefore the benchmark of the world cup is not that relevant for most of us who referee lower down the pyramid.
Second - comparing " the olden days" to now is not really relevant. There are many things in modern life that are very different to when I was growing up but lamenting on them when people are looking for modern day advice is really not the answer. That's like saying "my child is misbehaving at school" and getting and answer of "he should be sent to the head for a swift six of the best" not very practical.
At the pro game level, the players are professional athletes and during a game and are surrounded by a top medical team including qualified doctors, along with paramedics on site.
Compare this with your local grassroots game. How many times have you called a "trainer" on for it to be someone who waddles on with a bottle of water to squirt on the player, or if they are lucky a can of freeze spray?
Therefore the benchmark of the world cup is not that relevant for most of us who referee lower down the pyramid.
Second - comparing " the olden days" to now is not really relevant. There are many things in modern life that are very different to when I was growing up but lamenting on them when people are looking for modern day advice is really not the answer. That's like saying "my child is misbehaving at school" and getting and answer of "he should be sent to the head for a swift six of the best" not very practical.
So should @Peter Grove retire from the forum, leaving us bereft of historic contribution?
There’s a distinct difference between providing law changes and referring back to older versions to help a discussion, and making comments like ‘20 years ago that was a great tackle’ when a new ref is looking for advice
This thread for example is a discussion about how we’d deal with extreme weather conditions. Talking about the 80’s doesn’t aid that conversation when times have changed and people are looking for guidance for this weeks games, not one 40 years ago
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
Discussing old laws, and the reasons for law changes is a good exercise and can help understanding current laws when you see how they have evolved over time.
But refering to a law from the 80s isn't going to help a referee who has question about a game next week, because he isn't going to be refereeing under the laws from the 80s he's going to be refereeing under the 19/20 laws.
Time change and things move on, sometimes for the better and some times for the worse. Some people need to accept this, and appreciate that there is a time to reminisce about the past, but it's not when some one is asking about current laws.
Justylove
RefChat Addict
Maybe we should have a sub forum called "back in the day"
I can see your angle, but the thread has gotten so far off topic that your reference back to the topic is tenuous
I just think it's short sighted to dismiss years gone by so emphatically because they were our formative years for where we are now. Past life experience moulds us as referees far more than the content of a badly written book, so I think it's entirely relevant for us older members to reflect back to our cultivating years. To get back on topic, high temperatures weren't a problem until very recently, so I accept that we've seriously digressed (because many completely misunderstand Sheff's mischievous contributions and take every word literally)
Justylove
RefChat Addict
Take head and blood injuries then.
I remember Terry Butcher completely covered in blood playing for England in the 1980's. Likewise Paul Ince v Italy (it was the second date with a young lady who is now my wife). Showing a picture of those players or referring to them if a referee comes on asking about how you deal with blood injuries adds nothing to the debate whatsoever.
Whether you think the LOTG are written on the "infinite monkeys transcribing the works for Shakespeare" principle or not, these are the laws that every referee on the planet, regardless of colour, religion, nationality or religious belief is expected to follow. Where there are gaps and it's open to interpretation, that's where we all seek advice from time to time to gain a consensus opinion (or a definitive answer).
There are innumerable examples of how we've learned from past mistakes; equivalently, many things have changed detrimentally
You've lost me at that point!
Not much point clarifying, I'm done with this topic
Don’t get me wrong, I accept experience and people using situations they’ve been in to aid people’s development on here. That really is how this forum should work. My point is that bringing up things from years gone by which have categorically been ruled out by the laws of the game (such as forcefulness of challenges, handball etc etc) is now irrelevant.
- Status