Round ball code talk

[manureid]

Those were non-skilled dives, although Rivaldo's (the first one) was justified. He was hit, and the opposing player should have gotten the red card for it. Rivaldo just made sure the ref would apply the law correctly.

I thought he could have done a better job, but his instinct was right.

You are definitely not Australian. Ball hit him on the knee and he falls over clutching his face ffs. Straight red for being a campaigner imo. The fact he got the other guy sent off makes it a shooting offense. If the ball hit him and he didnt act like a campaigner, the other guy should get a yellow maybe for booting it that way, but the acting by Rivaldo is a disgrace.

Justified lol

 

[GremioPower]

You are definitely not Australian. Ball hit him on the knee and he falls over clutching his face ffs. Straight red for being a campaigner imo. The fact he got the other guy sent off makes it a shooting offense. If the ball hit him and he didnt act like a campaigner, the other guy should get a yellow maybe for booting it that way, but the acting by Rivaldo is a disgrace.

Justified lol

You see... There is no debate around the facts, but we definitely see the play differently. I always found this kind of disagreement fascinating!

Fact 1: The guy kicked the ball at Rivaldo.
That's "violent conduct," which is punished with straight red card.

Fact 2: Rivaldo pretended the hit was harder and in a different place than it actually was.
That's "simulation," which is punished with a yellow card.

It is all in the book: http://www.fifa.com/mm/Document/Foo...0/11/67/Lawsofthegame2017-2018-EN_Neutral.pdf

"simulation:" p.101
"violent conduct:" p.103

 

[manureid]

You see... There is no debate around the facts, but we definitely see the play differently. I always found this kind of disagreement fascinating!

Fact 1: The guy kicked the ball at Rivaldo.
That's "violent conduct," which is punished with straight red card.

Fact 2: Rivaldo pretended the hit was harder and in a different place than it actually was.
That's "simulation," which is punished with a yellow card.

It is all in the book: http://www.fifa.com/mm/Document/Foo...0/11/67/Lawsofthegame2017-2018-EN_Neutral.pdf

"simulation:" p.101
"violent conduct:" p.103

Mate, I have been hit harder by fairy dust thrown by a baby from a pram. It is just a 'South American' thing I guess. Doesn't fly in this country.

 

[GremioPower]

Totally. His actions got an innocent player sent off at a critical juncture in the game.

Innocent?

 

[ash_78]

If it was a hard or a soft hit, that is irrelevant. Spitting is a red card offense, for instance. But, yes, I think we are weighting the facts differently due cultural differences - which fascinate me.




"That is no comparison to outright theatre and cheating as in those soccer gifs."

Just to be clear, I have said those were bad examples.

I think there are slightly different conversations going on here.

GremioPower is stating his interpretation of the actual official rules for diving in soccer.

manureid and DaTBird187 are stating what the rules for diving in soccer should be.

There's no conflict in your arguments, unless GremioPower is actually defending the rules?

 

[manureid]

Innocent?

Lets face it, if he wasnt a diving prick, and the ball hits him at the half rat power it does, the ref, being a man of common sense says to the fella, mate, no need for that, just roll it back, and then we all get on with a crucial world cup game without the need to be outraged.

But nope.

 

[GremioPower]

I think there are slightly different conversations going on here.

GremioPower is stating his interpretation of the actual official rules for diving in soccer.

manureid and DaTBird187 are stating what the rules for diving in soccer should be.

There's no conflict in your arguments, unless GremioPower is actually defending the rules?

I am sort of defending them, but they seem to me as natural as sunset in the West and a warm Christmas' Day. I wouldn't defend the sunset...

I take those rules as part of the game. I don't see anything wrong with them.

 

[manureid]

Also. retrospective bans, particularly in World Cups, for blatant diving to get people sent off should be done. If you are diving to get someone sent off in the semi final to make sure your team gets there, you may think twice if you know you will be banned from playing it it.

 

[GremioPower]

Lets face it, if he wasnt a diving prick, and the ball hits him at the half rat power it does, the ref, being a man of common sense says to the fella, mate, no need for that, just roll it back, and then we all get on with a crucial world cup game without the need to be outraged.

But nope.

If the Turkish guy doesn't have a brain diarrhea and actually deliver the ball properly to Rivaldo, "we all get on with a crucial world cup game without the need to be outraged."

Kicking a dead ball at an opponent is the worst offense here. The ref would have been wrong in not sending off the Turkish player, regardless of Rivaldo's reaction.

 

[manureid]

If the Turkish guy doesn't have a brain diarrhea and actually deliver the ball properly to Rivaldo, "we all get on with a crucial world cup game without the need to be outraged."

Kicking a dead ball at an opponent is the worst offense here. The ref would have been wrong in not sending off the Turkish player, regardless of Rivaldo's reaction.

This is so wrong it doesn't bear discussing anymore.

 

[GremioPower]

This is so wrong it doesn't bear discussing anymore.

I am just stating what the Laws of the Game say. Simulation is punished with yellow card; violent conduct, with red. Deliberately kicking the ball at a fellow player is violent conduct.

Moreover, in this particular case, I am also saying that if the Turkish player had abided the Law, Rivaldo wouldn't have simulated anything.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

You know its election time in SA when.....

New $26 million soccer complex to be built at Gepps Cross by Football Federation SA
A NEW $26 million soccer hub featuring a 5000-capacity stadium, four synthetic pitches, an indoor futsal complex and 10 outdoor five-a-side courts will be built at Gepps Cross. The Advertiser can exclusively reveal Football Federation SA has received State Government funding to establish a State Centre of Football on 15ha of vacant land at the State Sports Park. The governing body believed the facility, which would be operational by 2020, would boost participation numbers beyond the 40,000 men, women and juniors who play the game in SA. It would also provide a venue for local club games, state development programs, and national and international tournaments, as well as school and community group use. FFSA chief executive Michael Carter said the “world class” complex would attract up to 1500 participants weekly. “It’s got great potential to be the best (soccer) centre in Australia,” Carter said.
.....
It would also be compliant for W-League and National Youth League clashes and would be a potential training venue should Australia stage the 2023 Women’s World Cup.
.......
The State Government committed $19 million to stage one of the project which would begin this year on land east of the Croatian Sports Centre......Carter said the federation would seek the remaining $7 million from other partners to complete the hub......
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messe...a/news-story/341bf2502bf813add860fef585243a82

An artist’s impression of the new $26 million State Centre of Football which will be built by Football Federation SA at Gepps Cross. Picture: Supplied

The State Centre of Football will feature three indoor futsal courts. Picture: Supplied

An artist’s impression of the 10 synthetic five-a-side pitches at the new Gepps Cross State Centre of Football. Picture: Supplied

The State Centre of Football will boast a 5000-capacity stadium and a new administration base for Football Federation SA. Picture: Supplied

 

[mic59]

What about the sticks through the players shoulders?

 

[Del80659]

he's got a point, rivaldo dived because he was given the opportunity, it's like when a footy player has a free kick and purposefully doesn't catch the ball the opponent is giving back to him so it can bounce and they can go "wtf 50 meters!!!!". using your opponents mistake to your advantage, whether you're pretending you were hurt or couldn't catch the ball is just deception

 

[DaTBird187]

Also. retrospective bans, particularly in World Cups, for blatant diving to get people sent off should be done. If you are diving to get someone sent off in the semi final to make sure your team gets there, you may think twice if you know you will be banned from playing it it.

BINGO.

 

[El_Scorcho]

I played soccer as a kid and then came back for a few seasons as an adult, and I can remember being adamant that I wouldn't so much as make the most of contact. I'd play fair and get back up straight away and continue.

Then I got awfully hacked down several times and bounced back up without so much as a whistle.

The frustration built within me and about 3/4 of the way through the season I got tackled badly, and instead of bouncing up I sat up and straightened my shinpad for a few seconds. Bang, yellow card and a free kick in a good area.

Sometimes an official thinks it's a free kick but if you don't make the most of the contact they'll assume it must have been fair. The same thing happens in sport everywhere. Basketball, footy, soccer, everywhere.

What Rivaldo did was shamefully ridiculous, but the Turkish player still deserved a red. I'd be fully supportive of retrospective bans for simulation, but I think you'll find that most dodgy calls are minor contact that's exaggerated as opposed to no-contact dives.

 

[SteppingTiger]

I am just stating what the Laws of the Game say. Simulation is punished with yellow card; violent conduct, with red. Deliberately kicking the ball at a fellow player is violent conduct.

Moreover, in this particular case, I am also saying that if the Turkish player had abided the Law, Rivaldo wouldn't have simulated anything.

Appreciate you are highlighting the rules, so will not argue that, but ‘violent conduct’ and deliberately kicking the ball at a player seems so poorly worded when applied to what happens in a game. What makes it difficult to accept the combination of deliberate acts and simulation acts for me -

1) players kick the ball into others deliberately all the time - I.e. trying to earn a throw in at the sideline

2) players stand 5 meters (might be 10) lined up as a wall to defend free kicks and the opposing player is trying to kick past them, (not deliberate as such) but is also kicking the ball at considerable speed. Defenders try to get hit in this instance to deflect the kick,

3) if Rivaldo was in the 6 yard box and one of his players blasted the ball and it hit him in the same way and deflected into goal, the only thing he would be simulating is that he was solely responsible for the goal...

Whilst the rules are the rules, the ‘vibe’ is what many will struggle with

(Apologies Gremio, but the ‘vibe’ is an Australian movie reference)

 

[GremioPower]

Appreciate you are highlighting the rules, so will not argue that, but ‘violent conduct’ and deliberately kicking the ball at a player seems so poorly worded when applied to what happens in a game. What makes it difficult to accept the combination of deliberate acts and simulation acts for me -

1) players kick the ball into others deliberately all the time - I.e. trying to earn a throw in at the sideline

2) players stand 5 meters (might be 10) lined up as a wall to defend free kicks and the opposing player is trying to kick past them, (not deliberate as such) but is also kicking the ball at considerable speed. Defenders try to get hit in this instance to deflect the kick,

3) if Rivaldo was in the 6 yard box and one of his players blasted the ball and it hit him in the same way and deflected into goal, the only thing he would be simulating is that he was solely responsible for the goal...

Whilst the rules are the rules, the ‘vibe’ is what many will struggle with

(Apologies Gremio, but the ‘vibe’ is an Australian movie reference)

Sorry, my bad. I wanted to say "kicking a DEAD ball at an opponent." I thought I had written that, actually. Hm. Nevermind...

I agree that there are situations in which kicking a ball at an opponent is acceptable (if not the best play). In this particular case, however, the ball was not in play, and Rivaldo was off the field. It was aggression, pure and simple.

 

[TeeKray]

I played soccer as a kid and then came back for a few seasons as an adult, and I can remember being adamant that I wouldn't so much as make the most of contact. I'd play fair and get back up straight away and continue.

Then I got awfully hacked down several times and bounced back up without so much as a whistle.

The frustration built within me and about 3/4 of the way through the season I got tackled badly, and instead of bouncing up I sat up and straightened my shinpad for a few seconds. Bang, yellow card and a free kick in a good area.

Sometimes an official thinks it's a free kick but if you don't make the most of the contact they'll assume it must have been fair. The same thing happens in sport everywhere. Basketball, footy, soccer, everywhere.

What Rivaldo did was shamefully ridiculous, but the Turkish player still deserved a red. I'd be fully supportive of retrospective bans for simulation, but I think you'll find that most dodgy calls are minor contact that's exaggerated as opposed to no-contact dives.

This is my theory as to why Tredders never used to get many free kicks as compared to the Riewoldt's and Pavlich's of this world. He'd stay strong in the contest no matter what infringement occurred and the umpires would just think there wasn't much to the contact so it's play on. It might seem a bit off but you really do have to make sure the officials see contact or they are going to be inclined to wave play on.

 

[Grave Danger]

Piers Morgan makes an arse... of himself

 

[mic59]

Newcastle United have had one of their infrequent and highly celebrated wins against Man. United. With no salary cap in the EPL any win like this will always be a big thing to the fans.
It's always difficult to work out team values as different sources seem to have different parameters but a daily star article in September put Newcastle's value at 115.4m pounds and Manchester United's at 547.5m pounds. This is based on transfer value only and another source has Manchester United's value at 2887m pounds and Newcastle's at 383m pounds.

 

[Grave Danger]

Newcastle United have had one of their infrequent and highly celebrated wins against Man. United. With no salary cap in the EPL any win like this will always be a big thing to the fans.
It's always difficult to work out team values as different sources seem to have different parameters but a daily star article in September put Newcastle's value at 115.4m pounds and Manchester United's at 547.5m pounds. This is based on transfer value only and another source has Manchester United's value at 2887m pounds and Newcastle's at 383m pounds.

Make of this what you will:

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/teuersteElf/wettbewerb/GB1/saison_id/2017

 

[mic59]

Make of this what you will:

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/teuersteElf/wettbewerb/GB1/saison_id/2017

Saw one from the same website except it was in Euros. It seemed to say Man U's value was 665m pounds. Although unlike the earlier one I quoted this was meant to be current.

 

[Greasyrhys]

COYR

 

[Greasyrhys]

Safe to say that ‘football’ in Australia is beyond a joke, especially with stupid referees in charge of games. Something has to change ASAP