URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       RateTheRef
  HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 22792--------------------------------------------------
       Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: LateTackle
       Date: November 8, 2020, 9:27 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       From what I have seen of this game, it seems to sum up
       everything that is wrong with the way the game has gone at top
       level.  The first penalty was harsh in the extreme, as the ball
       was driven against the arm of a defender from all of 2 yards
       away, and the defender was simply running rather than attempting
       to block with his arm.  Now I know there are people who will say
       that - under the modern interpretation - that it was technically
       correct.  But is that really what we want from the game?  I'm
       sure that, when the laws were written, this was not what was
       intended.  Whatever happened to 'intent'?
       I have just seen another incident where Madison and a defender
       were involved in a challenge.  Madison, a serial simulator since
       his youth days at Coventry, actually kicks the calf of his
       opponent, then falls to the floor as if he has been shot.  The
       referee carded the defender!  Unbelievable!
       It is all this nonsense that has made me fall out with the game
       altogether.  Joke handballs.  Players feeling the slightest
       brush of contact and hurling themselves down in agony to deceive
       the referee as they 'have the right to go down'.  Penalties
       given all over the place for virtually nothing.  I have
       concluded that we could actually dispense with the tedious and
       pointless formality of the game itself and decide all games by
       penalty shoot outs.
       #Post#: 22794--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: TVOS
       Date: November 8, 2020, 9:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       On the other hand, in the FA Cup, Torquay have just lost 5-6 at
       home to Crawley.
       #Post#: 22795--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: LateTackle
       Date: November 8, 2020, 10:01 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: TVOS link ---
       >
       > On the other hand, in the FA Cup, Torquay have just lost 5-6
       at home to Crawley.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I had been watching that programme.  But typical BBC, they ended
       the programme just as the games were getting to the business
       end, for some pointless drivel.  Even before that, they changed
       channels halfway through.   ::)
       #Post#: 22797--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: ajb95
       Date: November 8, 2020, 10:03 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: LateTackle link ---
       >
       > From what I have seen of this game, it seems to sum up
       everything that is wrong with the way the game has gone at top
       level.  The first penalty was harsh in the extreme, as the ball
       was driven against the arm of a defender from all of 2 yards
       away, and the defender was simply running rather than attempting
       to block with his arm.  Now I know there are people who will say
       that - under the modern interpretation - that it was technically
       correct.  But is that really what we want from the game?  I'm
       sure that, when the laws were written, this was not what was
       intended.  Whatever happened to 'intent'?
       >
       > I have just seen another incident where Madison and a defender
       were involved in a challenge.  Madison, a serial simulator since
       his youth days at Coventry, actually kicks the calf of his
       opponent, then falls to the floor as if he has been shot.  The
       referee carded the defender!  Unbelievable!
       >
       > It is all this nonsense that has made me fall out with the
       game altogether.  Joke handballs.  Players feeling the slightest
       brush of contact and hurling themselves down in agony to deceive
       the referee as they 'have the right to go down'.  Penalties
       given all over the place for virtually nothing.  I have
       concluded that we could actually dispense with the tedious and
       pointless formality of the game itself and decide all games by
       penalty shoot outs.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       And this is supposed to be England’s no1 referee...
       #Post#: 22800--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: PhiltheRef
       Date: November 8, 2020, 10:48 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Not supposed to be.....is perceived to be by some in positions
       to adjudicate on such matters.
       Not seen the game but the penalty, as described, is one under
       the current interpretation of handball. Given that
       interpretation, to have not awarded it would doubtless have
       adversely affected how his performance was evaluated.
       Not seen the other issue raised but I would speculate that you
       will not have had the same view, at the same speed and angle as
       the match referee
       #Post#: 22801--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: guest42
       Date: November 8, 2020, 11:02 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Some people still perceive that Trump won the election.
       Doesn’t make them right though...
       #Post#: 22802--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: rustyref
       Date: November 8, 2020, 11:22 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       It is a penalty under the current laws, just as the one just
       given against Liverpool is.  I don't agree with the law, and I
       don't think the PGMOL referees do either, but they can only as
       they are instructed.  The only good thing from it is there is at
       least now consistency across penalty decisions for handling.
       #Post#: 22803--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: PhiltheRef
       Date: November 8, 2020, 11:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Just seen Man City awarded a penalty v Liverpool.
       Current Law interpretation says penalty.
       I prefer Gary Neville's evaluation of the self same
       interpretation
       "Nonsense"
       #Post#: 22804--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: carrowman
       Date: November 8, 2020, 11:33 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: rustyref link ---
       >
       > It is a penalty under the current laws, just as the one just
       given against Liverpool is.  I don't agree with the law, and I
       don't think the PGMOL referees do either, but they can only as
       they are instructed.  The only good thing from it is there is at
       least now consistency across penalty decisions for handling.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Consistency in the Premier League but only given by using VAR,
       but not consistent with any other leagues in England.
       #Post#: 22809--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leicester v Wolves (A Taylor)
   DIR By: LateTackle
       Date: November 8, 2020, 12:58 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: PhiltheRef link ---
       >
       > Not supposed to be.....is perceived to be by some in positions
       to adjudicate on such matters.
       >
       > Not seen the game but the penalty, as described, is one under
       the current interpretation of handball. Given that
       interpretation, to have not awarded it would doubtless have
       adversely affected how his performance was evaluated.
       > Not seen the other issue raised but I would speculate that you
       will not have had the same view, at the same speed and angle as
       the match referee
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I'm afraid the lunatics have taken over the asylum now.  It is
       fair to say that the referee cannot be criticised for enforcing
       a farcical rule, the alternative being that he would be out of a
       job.  Perhaps some may feel that Taylor is the top referee.  My
       view is that he is probably the one who closest interprets the
       various decrees and interpretations, which is not the same thing
       at all.  I remember when I was a young referee, who could recite
       the laws parrot fashion, that it was more important to know the
       game than know the rules.  In other word, the best referees have
       a 'feel' for the game and I'm not sure they all do.  It's a pity
       Law 18 was abolished! :'(
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 4
   DIR Next Page