|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Feb 8, 2012 8:50:35 GMT
Do you think (or can any of the really old, oldies remember  when they banned barging a keeper over the line with the ball, I wonder if there a similar outcry to that of today with the issue of the sliding tackle? |
|
|
|
Post by stokerambler on Feb 8, 2012 9:37:40 GMT
There is a much greater furore about tackling now than about barging the goalkeeper over the line, simply because modern media and technology facilitates a wider debate.
I'm too young to remember when they outlawed barging the goalkeeper over the line (late 1950s?) but in the late 60s / early 70s players could still kick the ball out of a goalkeepers hands legally and it's only in the last 10 years that goalkeepers have become virtually untouchable.
As for tackling, the tackle from behind was rightfully outlawed to protect players - too many were having their achilles snapped. You can still come from behind to tackle but you must go in from the side.
The current debate is confused because what constitutes reckless / excessive force in a tackle is open to interpretation. It doesn't help when some managers (eg Mancini) appear to believe it is the two footed tackle that is outlawed when it is actually not (rather a two footed challenge is liable to be viewed as reckless if the studs are showing).
Rather than changing the rules it would be better if, when these contentious debates arise, the Premier League gathers all the managers together and a panel from the Select Group of Refs to provide clarity and transparency on the intepretation of the rule in question.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Feb 8, 2012 9:49:37 GMT
There is a much greater furore about tackling now than about barging the goalkeeper over the line, simply because modern media and technology facilitates a wider debate. I'm too young to remember when they outlawed barging the goalkeeper over the line (late 1950s?) but in the late 60s / early 70s players could still kick the ball out of a goalkeepers hands legally and it's only in the last 10 years that goalkeepers have become virtually untouchable. As for tackling, the tackle from behind was rightfully outlawed to protect players - too many were having their achilles snapped. You can still come from behind to tackle but you must go in from the side. The current debate is confused because what constitutes reckless / excessive force in a tackle is open to interpretation. It doesn't help when some managers (eg Mancini) appear to believe it is the two footed tackle that is outlawed when it is actually not (rather a two footed challenge is liable to be viewed as reckless if the studs are showing). Rather than changing the rules it would be better if, when these contentious debates arise, the Premier League gathers all the managers together and a panel from the Select Group of Refs to provide clarity and transparency on the intepretation of the rule in question. And make sure the players have NO DOUBT as to what is acceptable |
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Feb 8, 2012 10:00:27 GMT
There is a much greater furore about tackling now than about barging the goalkeeper over the line, simply because modern media and technology facilitates a wider debate. I'm too young to remember when they outlawed barging the goalkeeper over the line (late 1950s?) but in the late 60s / early 70s players could still kick the ball out of a goalkeepers hands legally and it's only in the last 10 years that goalkeepers have become virtually untouchable. As for tackling, the tackle from behind was rightfully outlawed to protect players - too many were having their achilles snapped. You can still come from behind to tackle but you must go in from the side. The current debate is confused because what constitutes reckless / excessive force in a tackle is open to interpretation. It doesn't help when some managers (eg Mancini) appear to believe it is the two footed tackle that is outlawed when it is actually not (rather a two footed challenge is liable to be viewed as reckless if the studs are showing). Rather than changing the rules it would be better if, when these contentious debates arise, the Premier League gathers all the managers together and a panel from the Select Group of Refs to provide clarity and transparency on the intepretation of the rule in question. Therein lies the problem. Nobody knows what the rules are any more. How can they when they see so much disparity between decisions. Referees are not consistent. Atkinson sent off Huth for using 'excessive force', and on the same day, a two-footed, over-the-top tackle was allowed by another. There is a way out of all this. We have so much technology in the game now that it would be possible for a referee to sin-bin a player he thought had committed a serious offence, for five minutes, and then a panel of two adjudicators with the hindsight of technology could make the final decision on the punishment. For example, the Huth incident would have gone through the procedure while he was sin-binned, and then he would have been given a yellow card instead of a red one. Off-the-field technology is the way forward. It doesn't need to interfere with the game other than make a team do without a player for five minutes. Equally, it would cut out cheating, too. At the end of every game, the panel would ajudicate on every contentious decision and root out the cheats. Anyone found to be cheating would face a five match automatic ban without recourse to appeal. Referees need help today. We have the technology to help them, but the same powers that are bringing in all the new rules, simply won't accept that technology is the way forward, because 'they don't want to spoil the game'. Well, if cheating is prospering and wrong decisions are being made on a regular basis, then what else is that other than spoiling the game? OS. |
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Feb 8, 2012 10:27:13 GMT
Football will become so sterlised,that one day it will be a foul to kick the ball above waist height in case it hits a players in the face.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2012 10:56:20 GMT
the simple problem is that there are far too few rules in the game that are NOT open to interpretation and where the referee has concrete guidelines to follow.
the point raised above re: two footed tackling is a case in point. the rule is NOT that studs have to be shown to be deemed reckless at all (as was clearly illustrated by the Huth tackle on Saturday where he went in without showing studs at all but still received a red card), the idea of reckless is decided upon by the referee at the time and takes into account factors such as the speed in which the player goes in, whether he is likely to have any chance of winning the ball, whether he is control of the tackle etc.
Likewise in the offside rule where they are far too many grey areas regarding the famous "Second phase", whether players are deemed to be interfering with play (although as Bill Shanky once put it: "If a player is not interfering with play or trying to gain an advantage then he should be ") etc.
to be fair i feel that it is less about needing rule changes, more the need for rule clarification.
the ref's really don't have an easy job at all to be fair to them as too much emphasis is placed upon their interpretation of the law rather than being given concrete rules to follow and it is this which causes the outcries regarding inconsistency; their is inevitably going to be inconsistency if ref's are told they have to judge each decision on it's own merits and are only given a split second to do so and therefore the players are left in limbo as to what they can and cannot do i.e Huth and Kompany being sent off (1 for an uncontrolled tackle without showing studs and 1 for showing studs despite the fact that he got the ball cleanly without contacting the player).
the players need rules they can follow and adhere to NOT rules where they are expected to make value judgments in a split second during a full blooded, up and at them game where they have to take into account weather condidtions, who the ref is on a particular day and whether he is more likely than another ref to deem something as reckless. the players and referee's cannot make these judgements without clear and defined laws rather than having to abide by laws which are constantly going to be subjectively interpreted depending on which ref you get on any given match day.
|
|
|
|
Post by swampmongrel on Feb 8, 2012 11:27:17 GMT
Do you think (or can any of the really old, oldies remember when they banned barging a keeper over the line with the ball, I wonder if there a similar outcry to that of today with the issue of the sliding tackle? I imagine that March remembers it. In fact I imagine he's probably still seething about that rule change fifty odd years on  |
|
when they banned barging a keeper over the line with the ball, I wonder if there a similar outcry to that of today with the issue of the sliding tackle?
