yorkie1999 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 2 hours ago, UniFox21 said: I'd love if VAR/PGMOL released a statement explaining the logic behind each decision being made: so the N'didi handball explaining why it overruled the on-field decision, why it felt DCL didn't foul Soyuncu etc. Like they did with Antonio's offside in the Chelsea game. Why do we need to wait for controversial decisions for the thought processes to be brought out? To give themselves some time to work out a plausible explanation so they can control the results in games. If everything regarding decisions was laid down in black and white i.e. if we knew that a handball would be given if a player has his arm in the air and it prevents the ball from hitting the head of a player attempting to head in for a goal thereby denying the possibility of a goal, then there wouldn't be any arguments or allegations of corruption, but as it stands a decision can be given with no come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudulike Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 7 minutes ago, st albans fox said: i think the foul on cags is irrelevant. i believe that they are only checking the possible handball and nothing else. if a pen is awarded then they check for other stuff going on in and around - the whole thing is badly thought out and in this country especially, poorly implemented So, had the ref given a penalty then it would've been overturned by VAR? Is it too much to expect to have them working in tandem to get a correct decision? Its becoming unwatchable and I'm losing interest, to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Fox Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 I think we’re going to scrape it. Our form has been worse than poor but I think we’ll pick up 2 wins and 2 draws along the way. No idea where but the rot has to stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 2 minutes ago, Spudulike said: So, had the ref given a penalty then it would've been overturned by VAR? Is it too much to expect to have them working in tandem to get a correct decision? Its becoming unwatchable and I'm losing interest, to be honest. common sense is irrelevant - the laws are the laws and the VAR procedures aren't able to be interfered with by refs etc. had the ref given the pen, then the irony is that the foul on cags would have been checked (i doubt they would have overturned though ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniFox21 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 20 minutes ago, st albans fox said: i think the foul on cags is irrelevant. i believe that they are only checking the possible handball and nothing else. if a pen is awarded then they check for other stuff going on in and around - the whole thing is badly thought out and in this country especially, poorly implemented Why would the foul be irrelevant? Surely if there's another situation in the box that would override the penalty decision it would be considered? It's incredibly poorly implemented. 18 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said: To give themselves some time to work out a plausible explanation so they can control the results in games. If everything regarding decisions was laid down in black and white i.e. if we knew that a handball would be given if a player has his arm in the air and it prevents the ball from hitting the head of a player attempting to head in for a goal thereby denying the possibility of a goal, then there wouldn't be any arguments or allegations of corruption, but as it stands a decision can be given with no come back. Which is why we need to have actual knowledge of what the hell goes on in Stockley Park rather than decisions being made. There are 0 repercussions to any official for poor decisions. David Coote made a potential awful decision missing a potential handball for Spurs goal vs West Ham, yet the next game week he's officiating Leicester vs Everton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post davieG Posted 2 July 2020 Popular Post Share Posted 2 July 2020 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53261364 Gambling in football: Betting sponsorship on shirts should be banned - Lords report By Alistair Magowan BBC Sport 10 clubs in the Premier League are currently sponsored by gambling firms Premier League clubs should not be allowed to have betting firms on their shirts, a House of Lords Select Committee report has recommended. The cross-party committee, set up to look at the impact of the United Kingdom's gambling industry, also says such sponsors on Championship club shirts should be phased out by 2023, and that other sports should end shirt betting sponsorship in three years. This season, half of Premier League clubs and 17 of 24 Championship clubs are sponsored by bookmakers. The recommendations are part of a 192-page report warning more needs to be done to prevent gambling-related harm, with the Gambling Act 2005 currently under review by ministers. Campaigners believe betting has been normalised within football and can lead to addiction. The committee's recommendations also state: "There should be no gambling advertising in or near any sports grounds or sports venues, including sports programmes." But the report says restrictions on shirt sponsorship and other advertising "should not take effect for clubs below the Premier League before 2023. A similar flexibility should be allowed in the case of other sports". It added: "These restrictions should not apply to horseracing or greyhound racing." The report said removing betting sponsorship entirely would "not unduly harm Premier League clubs but it would very probably have a serious effect on smaller clubs. "We therefore think they should be given time, perhaps three years, to adapt to the new situation. They would not be allowed in that time to enter into new sponsorship contracts with gambling companies, but any existing contracts could continue until they terminate, and clubs would have time to seek alternative sources of sponsorship." The English Football League (EFL) says the gambling sector contributes £40m a season to the league and its clubs and with the financial problems of the coronavirus pandemic, this "significant" contribution is "as important now as it has ever been". It also says working to prevent gambling problems with the betting companies is of "greater benefit" than a ban. In a response to the Lords' report, the EFL said in a statement: "The association between football and the gambling sector is long-standing and the League firmly believes a collaborative, evidence-based approach to preventing gambling harms that is also sympathetic to the economic needs of sport will be of much greater benefit than the blunt instrument of blanket bans." The Lords report also mentioned how a 'whistle-to-whistle' ban on gambling advertising from five minutes before to five minutes after a match "is of very limited use when viewers, including children, can throughout the match see a plethora of gambling advertising on shirts and on the perimeter - and when they are in any case likely to be watching outside that whistle-to-whistle time". Chair of the committee, Lord Grade said: "Most people who gamble, enjoy it safely. "However, gambling related-harm has made the lives of two million people miserable. It leads to hundreds of people each year taking their own lives, leaving families and friends devastated." James Grimes, a former gambler who runs charity The Big Step which is tackling football's relationship with gambling, said: "We welcome the recommendation to remove gambling sponsorship and advertising in the Premier League immediately. "We've been calling on government and football to reduce gambling exposure to children, in order to prevent young people going through the same thing that I did. "Gambling advertising in football is at saturation point and it's normalised harmful products and practices to young people. No child should be exposed to adult products as prevalently as it is with gambling in football. "Premier League football has a responsibility to prevent gambling exposure to its young fans, which make up a quarter of its audience." BBC Sport has also contacted the Premier League for comment. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yorkie1999 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 51 minutes ago, UniFox21 said: Why would the foul be irrelevant? Surely if there's another situation in the box that would override the penalty decision it would be considered? It's incredibly poorly implemented. Which is why we need to have actual knowledge of what the hell goes on in Stockley Park rather than decisions being made. There are 0 repercussions to any official for poor decisions. David Coote made a potential awful decision missing a potential handball for Spurs goal vs West Ham, yet the next game week he's officiating Leicester vs Everton. It's like the refs have sat down and decided that they no longer want to be abused for bad decisions, which is fair enough, so they've come up with a system that near enough takes all their responsibility away from the game, but still want to remain in charge. and the knock on effect is they can punish teams or players without any come back. Sneaky fvckers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miquel The Work Geordie Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 1 hour ago, The Bear said: If Premier League managers were your step-dad. The Roy Hodgson one is spot on IMO. Saw this the other day and the pro for Daniel Farke made me spit squash out 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxfanazer Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 40 minutes ago, davieG said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53261364 Gambling in football: Betting sponsorship on shirts should be banned - Lords report By Alistair Magowan BBC Sport 10 clubs in the Premier League are currently sponsored by gambling firms Premier League clubs should not be allowed to have betting firms on their shirts, a House of Lords Select Committee report has recommended. The cross-party committee, set up to look at the impact of the United Kingdom's gambling industry, also says such sponsors on Championship club shirts should be phased out by 2023, and that other sports should end shirt betting sponsorship in three years. This season, half of Premier League clubs and 17 of 24 Championship clubs are sponsored by bookmakers. The recommendations are part of a 192-page report warning more needs to be done to prevent gambling-related harm, with the Gambling Act 2005 currently under review by ministers. Campaigners believe betting has been normalised within football and can lead to addiction. The committee's recommendations also state: "There should be no gambling advertising in or near any sports grounds or sports venues, including sports programmes." But the report says restrictions on shirt sponsorship and other advertising "should not take effect for clubs below the Premier League before 2023. A similar flexibility should be allowed in the case of other sports". It added: "These restrictions should not apply to horseracing or greyhound racing." The report said removing betting sponsorship entirely would "not unduly harm Premier League clubs but it would very probably have a serious effect on smaller clubs. "We therefore think they should be given time, perhaps three years, to adapt to the new situation. They would not be allowed in that time to enter into new sponsorship contracts with gambling companies, but any existing contracts could continue until they terminate, and clubs would have time to seek alternative sources of sponsorship." The English Football League (EFL) says the gambling sector contributes £40m a season to the league and its clubs and with the financial problems of the coronavirus pandemic, this "significant" contribution is "as important now as it has ever been". It also says working to prevent gambling problems with the betting companies is of "greater benefit" than a ban. In a response to the Lords' report, the EFL said in a statement: "The association between football and the gambling sector is long-standing and the League firmly believes a collaborative, evidence-based approach to preventing gambling harms that is also sympathetic to the economic needs of sport will be of much greater benefit than the blunt instrument of blanket bans." The Lords report also mentioned how a 'whistle-to-whistle' ban on gambling advertising from five minutes before to five minutes after a match "is of very limited use when viewers, including children, can throughout the match see a plethora of gambling advertising on shirts and on the perimeter - and when they are in any case likely to be watching outside that whistle-to-whistle time". Chair of the committee, Lord Grade said: "Most people who gamble, enjoy it safely. "However, gambling related-harm has made the lives of two million people miserable. It leads to hundreds of people each year taking their own lives, leaving families and friends devastated." James Grimes, a former gambler who runs charity The Big Step which is tackling football's relationship with gambling, said: "We welcome the recommendation to remove gambling sponsorship and advertising in the Premier League immediately. "We've been calling on government and football to reduce gambling exposure to children, in order to prevent young people going through the same thing that I did. "Gambling advertising in football is at saturation point and it's normalised harmful products and practices to young people. No child should be exposed to adult products as prevalently as it is with gambling in football. "Premier League football has a responsibility to prevent gambling exposure to its young fans, which make up a quarter of its audience." BBC Sport has also contacted the Premier League for comment. Totally agree with this. Having worked in the gambling industry I've seen first hand how it's ruined people's lives. I know some will say people should have more willpower but it'd be a lot easier if it wasn't always shoved in your face Had problems with gambling myself and its a really tough one to get out of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nalis Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 Draw in the Sheff Utd Spurs game is probably ideal for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambert09 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 2 hours ago, The Bear said: If Premier League managers were your step-dad. The Roy Hodgson one is spot on IMO. Not bad, but the Pearson one is so wrong. The geezers clearly only seen the ostrich rant. He’s a lovely bloke. Wouldn’t sleep with his daughter unless you want a head butt though 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrefelderFox666 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 12 minutes ago, Nalis said: Draw in the Sheff Utd Spurs game is probably ideal for us. Even if Spurs win, there is no chance they catch us unless we go winless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 2 hours ago, UniFox21 said: Why would the foul be irrelevant? Surely if there's another situation in the box that would override the penalty decision it would be considered? It's incredibly poorly I’m probably wrong but I thought the only thing they look for when over ruling the ref to give a pen is a foul in the actual incident they’re reviewing or an offside which negates the whole play. the assumption is that any other incidents at the time are outside the scope of the review because they are not supposed to re referee everything and if the ref didn’t see any foul then that’s accepted 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nalis Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 32 minutes ago, Lambert09 said: Not bad, but the Pearson one is so wrong. The geezers clearly only seen the ostrich rant. He’s a lovely bloke. Wouldn’t sleep with his daughter unless you want a head butt though Worth it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniFox21 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 32 minutes ago, st albans fox said: I’m probably wrong but I thought the only thing they look for when over ruling the ref to give a pen is a foul in the actual incident they’re reviewing or an offside which negates the whole play. the assumption is that any other incidents at the time are outside the scope of the review because they are not supposed to re referee everything and if the ref didn’t see any foul then that’s accepted Ah does make sense, not re refereeing the game even though that's essentially what they end up doing in most cases Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox92 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 1 hour ago, Nalis said: Draw in the Sheff Utd Spurs game is probably ideal for us. Personally don't think any of them are a threat to us anyway, even with our poor form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxes_rule1978 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Fox92 said: Personally don't think any of them are a threat to us anyway, even with our poor form. They are farther back then what I thought... the race for CL places is between us, chelsea, wolves and Man U Edited 2 July 2020 by foxes_rule1978 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanSP Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 49 minutes ago, Fox92 said: Personally don't think any of them are a threat to us anyway, even with our poor form. I want to agree with this so badly 9 & 10 points should be enough! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tickler28 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 When we play these 2 teams Spurs and Sheff Utd my prediction is Spurs outclass us and Sheffield Utd out battle us. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAFC1 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 Very nice that Spurs kit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trabuch Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 I hope Spurs crumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tickler28 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 2 minutes ago, SAFC1 said: Very nice that Spurs kit. Shame about the team wearing it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goody2028 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 2 minutes ago, SAFC1 said: Very nice that Spurs kit. Even nicer now 👍 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAFC1 Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 VAR..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheUltimateWinner Posted 2 July 2020 Share Posted 2 July 2020 Handball in the build up surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts