Jump to content
IGNORED

Football thread 2022/23


Naysonymous
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Fry Crayola said:

That would be worth a trial too, neither is definitively better in my mind. It's worth noting the IFAB's sheer reluctance to look at how rugby does anything, though, given the disparity in implemention of video reviews. They'd be more likely to invent something entirely new than look at successful implementations anywhere else.

 

I don't see a stop clock as such a radical change. The average time the ball was in play in the Premier League last season was just 55 minutes, so a fixed 60 minute clock wouldn't do much to adjust the televised length of the match, but would reduce the ability of either team to run the clock down through feigning injury, delaying the restart, and other elements which serve to frustrate or panic the opposition. 

 

A hiccup comes at the end of a half - currently, the referee has enough leeway to let an attack finish before they blow up. With a fixed clock, you'd want to retain that leeway rather than blow up as soon as the timer runs out. A rugby-style dead ball requirement could be an option there, but the games flow differently.

 

 

For me, a 90 minute match with a limited set of scenarios where the referee stops the clock is clearly better because it's an achievable change and improvement. The theory behind a 60 match with much more frequent stop the clock moments might be sound but selling the idea of changing to a 60 minute match seems a lot harder. Traditionalists would be up in arms at changing away from 90 minutes as it's been that way since eleventy dickedey do. 

 

If there was a handful of stop the clock incidents like:

 

-Between goals and restarts

-Players requiring physio treatment 

-Issuing yellow/red cards

-Substitutions 

 

People would know when the clock should be stopped and there wouldn't be as much confusion. It wouldn't be perfect but it'd be better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bear said:

 

 

For me, a 90 minute match with a limited set of scenarios where the referee stops the clock is clearly better because it's an achievable change and improvement. The theory behind a 60 match with much more frequent stop the clock moments might be sound but selling the idea of changing to a 60 minute match seems a lot harder. Traditionalists would be up in arms at changing away from 90 minutes as it's been that way since eleventy dickedey do. 

 

If there was a handful of stop the clock incidents like:

 

-Between goals and restarts

-Players requiring physio treatment 

-Issuing yellow/red cards

-Substitutions 

 

People would know when the clock should be stopped and there wouldn't be as much confusion. It wouldn't be perfect but it'd be better. 

 

That does little to address time wasting though, other than perhaps the slow walk off of a subbed player.

 

The majority of problems come from delaying the return of the ball to play, with a helthy dose of feigning injuries (without the need for a physio), which is why a stopped clock when not in play makes sense as it covers every type of shithousery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bear said:

People would know when the clock should be stopped and there wouldn't be as much confusion

 

Logically, there's be more confusion as to when the clock is stopped if it's not stopped every time. 

 

A trial of a couple of options is better, to my mind, than trying to second guess what people would accept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dismissive criticism from Jonathan Wilson on football weekly this week I think on Pulisic offering nothing but running in straight lines and being predictable. He does like running towards goal but so did Hazard and Pulisic is the closest thing I've seen to him, I saw a clip of Chelsea a while ago and thought it was Hazard. It might have been 1:29 here, 

 

 

I can't understand not being amazed by the close ball control and timing of his bursts of acceleration, the tight spins on the spot, it really is like watching prime Hazard. The move at 1:29 when sandwiched just hanging before taking the heavier touch inside. Like that Hazard move on Henderson.

 

Most of Hazard's game was just dribbling, but when you're one of the best to ever do it what's the issue. How can anyone who likes watching football not enjoy that. Then again Wilson thinks Zidane wasn't all that and loves cricket so I'm never going to understand his angle. I don't care about consistency of scoring or winning really, it's all just a platform for players to move with the ball in and around the opposition to me. 

 

Tuchel has done a great job in rotating his defence but I think he's completely messed up getting the most out of his attacking players. Barkey and Loftus Cheek have impressed in cup games and odd appearances but pretty much everyone forgets they exist most of the time. Barkley just 174 minutes in the league last season, last injured Jan 2021 so it's not that. Hudson Odoi is really talented, peripheral. Werner has got worse. Lukaku couldn't be fitted but maybe he's more to blame on that. Maybe Ziyech will never be consistent. Havertz was/is rated so highly and he's not really reached the heights people think he can. 

 

Patrick Viera has probably got the most out any Chelsea player and he's the Palace manager...big fish small pond maybe. 

 

Only Mount has improved but he's played more consistently, there's no doubt for him knowing he'll play, the others don't have that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, Loik V credern said:

How can anyone who likes watching football not enjoy that. Then again Wilson thinks Zidane wasn't all that and loves cricket so I'm never going to understand his angle.

 

Wilson prefers to care about innovation, regardless of results.  If some Ecuadorian coach happens to go on a five game winning streak using a 1-3-6 umbrella formation then he'll have written a 750 page book about it being the future of football before you can blink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Cox is another who doesn't rate Zidane (calls him inconsistent, only performed above metrics at major tournaments or some such) Statistically, that's probably fair, but as is often the way with stats, by their very design they don't capture the unmeasurable; Zidane had an elegance that isn't quantifiable on a data sheet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zidane was a joy to watch.   He probably played in an era which didn't suit his style much either, certainly at Madrid where they just threw as many superstars on the pitch as they could and hoped something clicked. 

 

I'd love to see a 25 year old Zidane playing as a false 9 in the modern era as he has all the attributes you'd need.  Brilliant at receiving the ball under pressure, could play a pass through the eye of a needle and was a big fucker who could mix it physically too.  Him in that Liverpool team where Firminho played?  Drool. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gave up on Cox and Wilson a couple of years ago, when I realised that they don't get any joy out of watching football and completely fail to understand why others do.

 

@glb nails it above.  Cox sees Zidane do his thing, looks at the numbers on the spreadsheet and decides it's Zidane who is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ajax have comically overpaid for Bassey. Great athlete but otherwise ordinary and prone to critical goal-losing brainfarts.

 

Have to begrudgingly admire the zombies for getting that much for such a player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Plissken said:

I gave up on Cox and Wilson a couple of years ago, when I realised that they don't get any joy out of watching football and completely fail to understand why others do.

 

@glb nails it above.  Cox sees Zidane do his thing, looks at the numbers on the spreadsheet and decides it's Zidane who is wrong.

 

3 hours ago, SMD said:

stats nonces

 

Big 'proper football man' vibes here.

 

Jonathan Wilson is primarily a football historian. He is not a particularly interesting or authoritative tactics writer, and never has been.

 

Michael Cox isn't an an analytics-based writer either, and his writing isn't heavy on stats at all - it's nearly all 'eye test' stuff and meticulous research. Besides, Real Madrid fans expressing frustration that Zidane didn't perform for them the way he did for France was 100% a thing in the 00s, and Agnelli wasn't exactly distraught to lose him to Real in the first place. Saying he could be inconsistent is a completely accurate and fair observation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, we're all subscribed to Big Sam's fanzine. Zidane was inconsistent but also an absolute genius, prone to moments of madness. Like an elite Eric Cantona.

 

They defy most metrics but football would be a lot poorer without such players' irregular moments of brilliance, think that was more the point, or it was from my side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scientists do science that says what we were saying here anyway - that is, that VAR and freeze framing video isn't accurate enough. On average, test participants were 132 ms late in determining when a ball was actually kicked. 

 

132 ms, by the way, can be a difference of 0.67 cm for a player moving at just 5 metres per second. Two players moving at that speed in opposite directions may result in a difference of over a metre from when the ball was actually kicked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fry Crayola said:

Scientists do science that says what we were saying here anyway - that is, that VAR and freeze framing video isn't accurate enough. On average, test participants were 132 ms late in determining when a ball was actually kicked. 

 

132 ms, by the way, can be a difference of 0.67 cm for a player moving at just 5 metres per second. Two players moving at that speed in opposite directions may result in a difference of over a metre from when the ball was actually kicked.

 

WAIT! So Mane's 1mm of offside sleeve for Henderson's winner in the derby could have been on!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, glb said:

Yeah, we're all subscribed to Big Sam's fanzine. Zidane was inconsistent but also an absolute genius, prone to moments of madness. Like an elite Eric Cantona.

 

They defy most metrics but football would be a lot poorer without such players' irregular moments of brilliance, think that was more the point, or it was from my side.

 

I was referring solely to the two posts I quoted, and I would agree with your assessment of Zidane here. The only thing I would contest from your initial post was that Cox "doesn't rate" him, as I think that's a bit hyperbolic. Arguing that Zidane rarely performed at a consistently high level across league campaigns doesn't mean he thinks he's crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Fox said:

 

I was referring solely to the two posts I quoted, and I would agree with your assessment of Zidane here. The only thing I would contest from your initial post was that Cox "doesn't rate" him, as I think that's a bit hyperbolic. Arguing that Zidane rarely performed at a consistently high level across league campaigns doesn't mean he thinks he's crap.


He said he didn’t really rate him on a recent Totally Football Show (and previous ones) :)

 

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy Cox (fnar!) but he’s wide of the mark on Zidane. But we’ve all got tiny hills to die on.

 

Edit: read back my previous reply, wasn’t meant to sound as snarky. Discount the ‘yeah’ at the start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Fox said:

 

 

Big 'proper football man' vibes here.

 

Jonathan Wilson is primarily a football historian. He is not a particularly interesting or authoritative tactics writer, and never has been.

 

Michael Cox isn't an an analytics-based writer either, and his writing isn't heavy on stats at all - it's nearly all 'eye test' stuff and meticulous research. Besides, Real Madrid fans expressing frustration that Zidane didn't perform for them the way he did for France was 100% a thing in the 00s, and Agnelli wasn't exactly distraught to lose him to Real in the first place. Saying he could be inconsistent is a completely accurate and fair observation.

 

I don't actually mind Wilson, he's just too obsessed with Bela Guttmann to take seriously. Michael Cox is absolute shite though and is one of the most boring additions to football journalism, which is a hell of an achievement.

 

I've got no problem with analytics in football, I think the data analysis has come on leaps and bounds and helps to identify players that may have been overlooked by top scouts in the past. What I've got a problem with are people who just view the sport in terms of stats and numbers. Football is too random and team play is too complicated to try and make it solely a numbers game - Stewart Downing was a great example of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, bradigor said:

 

WAIT! So Mane's 1mm of offside sleeve for Henderson's winner in the derby could have been on!!! 

 

Yes, almost certainly, along with a whole bunch of other close VAR offside decisions.  Before you retrospectively award yourselves the title, there may well have been a decision or two that went against Man City to balance it out.  :lol:  I nearly managed to type that with a straight face.  Although having said that, didn't Man City have a few really close VAR offsides go against them in Liverpool's title-winning season?  

 

The fact that we, a forum full of laymen, realised the flaw in VAR offsides and have been banging on about it for ages and yet the authorities either didn't realise or didn't care is kind of worrying.  It speaks of the arrogance of the officials who run football, from the suits to the referees, and their belief in their own infalability that they dismissed this argument for so long.

 

The introduction of a margin of error for next season is definitely a positive step.  At least they are finally learning.  The subjective VAR decisions will still go in all sorts of random directions, but at least offside decisions should be a bit better.  There will be plenty of pundits who don't understand what they are talking about to muddy the water no doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Adrock said:

Zidane was inconsistent? Seriously?

 

He's one of my favorite players ever, but yes.  He definitely was.  It was part of the appeal of the mysterious, mercurial genius.  He'd have games where he floated around doing very little, or was peripheral and then came up with something amazing.  He always turned up in the really big games, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, deerokus said:

Ajax have comically overpaid for Bassey. Great athlete but otherwise ordinary and prone to critical goal-losing brainfarts.

 

Can’t think of any at all. I can think of him bossing European quarter and semi finals however 🤔 

 

This was him against fucking Dortmund:

 

 

 

He would do this steamrollering of cunts pretty much every game. He is an incredible left sided centre back and an even better left back. He’s fucking class. If anything Ajax got a bargain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, feltmonkey said:

 

Yes, almost certainly, [WAFFLE]

 

Erm... that's the joke. VAR officials are shite, shock horror, news and all that. 

 

Rest of what you say though I totally agree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.