• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Football Thread

9 points clear at the top and top at the midway point of the season. Still, 18 games to go, but it would be sweet to win the league after 29 years and also 30 years after Hillsborough. Probably even more important for Liverpool fans is to finally get that SOB Duckenfield and justice for the 95 (96 including the last victim Tony Bland, but who technically is not included on the charge sheet, as he died more than 1 year after Hillsborough disaster) who perished 30 years ago. Trial starts in January.
 
Don't tend to watch football matches any more, but tonight's City v Liverpool game is a must see and looks like the match of the season so far.
 
RIP Gordon Banks. Legend of English football.

 
Last edited:
Is Liverpool's race run after that? They blew a massive lead in the table very quickly!
 
Is Liverpool's race run after that? They blew a massive lead in the table very quickly!

It isn't over until its over, but the match exposed yet again Liverpool's lack to creativity in midfield. Salah is not on form and he's incredibly left footed (really should have buried his one on one chance, but did not trust his right foot to bury it).
 
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/47542669

The FAI also send Jack Grealish Valentine's Day cards and have are still clinging on to the hope that they'll be included as the 33rd team in the 2010 World Cup...

I reckon we ban the sport over here, its too embarrassing.
In fairness it's not like we ever pick people under the age of 25. Probably the only candidate.

It's always really depressing when someone is getting talked up for having a big future for Ireland and then you google them and they're 27.
 
In fairness it's not like we ever pick people under the age of 25. Probably the only candidate.

It's always really depressing when someone is getting talked up for having a big future for Ireland and then you google them and they're 27.
I can't endorse it, better to give it to no one.
 
Great game between City and Spurs. Game of the year so far. VAR correctly called the Auguero offside.
 
What a game.

VAR has rightfully taken it's fair share of criticism but it was right tonight.
 
What a game.

VAR has rightfully taken it's fair share of criticism but it was right tonight.

VAR technology is pretty sound. The issue has been man's application of it (and the game's rules) which will hopefully get better over time. If they were to remove it in a couple of years everyone will be up in arms to bring it back.

Incredible game - the best I have seen in quite a while.
 
VAR correctly called the Auguero offside.
4 comments.
First, you are absolutely right, period.
Two, VAR exposes how little the average fan, commentators, players, former players, pundits and even some refs know about the rules. Half the planet said something along the lines of "that wasn't a pass, it was a deflection, there was no intent", which is completely irrelevant.
Three, i am actually surprised people got this on real time and checked it out. It was super fact, the deflection was small at best and given the intensity of the events that follow i dont think many spurs fans would have complained if the goal had stood (out of ignorance, clear). I think most of them were getting the pitchforks to go after Eriksen.
Four, i don't this particular rule. I had no skin in this game, but i think it'd be a better game if goals like these stood.

Unpopular opinion: VAR takes away a lot of the fun for me. I like controversy, i like human error. I want it.
 
Unpopular opinion: VAR takes away a lot of the fun for me. I like controversy, i like human error. I want it.

I like it when the best team wins. I don't like human error, injustices or when cheats prosper. When a team spends a whole week (or more) working hard in training and on tactics there must be nothing worse when all that hard work goes down the toilet due to one instance of foul play from the opposition or incompetent officiating. Having the likes of VAR and TMO in professional sports like football and rugby is a no-brainer for me.
 
I am also for VAR. it's pretty stupid not to have it when tv audiences at home can see whether it is offside, a penalty or went over the line. There's just too much money now at the top end of the game for it to change on an incorrect decision by a ref who can have the help of technology to clear things up. The only thing I would say is the delay in the game whilst VAR looks at it. But it adds drama whilst the decision is made.

Although City were the better team on the night and probably deserved to win. But I don't feel too sorry for them and hope it goes on to mess up the rest of their season.
 
I like it when the best team wins. I don't like human error, injustices or when cheats prosper. When a team spends a whole week (or more) working hard in training and on tactics there must be nothing worse when all that hard work goes down the toilet due to one instance of foul play from the opposition or incompetent officiating. Having the likes of VAR and TMO in professional sports like football and rugby is a no-brainer for me.
I understand and respect that. Let me put some context. I dont want VAR in footie but i do want TMOs in rugby. This apparent contradiction comes from how i was taught to play both sports as a kid. I see both games, very passionately but very differently.

In one i was told that rules are to be followed and that respect for authorities was paramount. I as told i could make mistakes but that i should never, for instance go purposedly to tacke someone in a high/unlawful way.

In the other i was taught something completely different. I was told that the rules are guidelines and that they are only applied if you get caught. I was also taught that, in footie, there are WAY more instances than in rugby where paying the price for committing an infraction is worth it the cost. This gives a lot of room to make calculated risks.

My job, in football, was to win and breaking the rules was an option as long as i was aware of the risk and cost of getting caught and made the appropriate cost/benefit analysis.
Last guys (generally #2) have to make a lot of this split-second decisions. A LOT.


Decades ago I thought i was kinda weird because i was sometimes thought a bit of a naive purist with my footie friends (who didnt play rugby) and a bit of a cinic with my rugby friends (most of who didnt care about footie). But i realized that among those who followed both sports my view was quite normal. We just "switched hats" depending on the sport and judge the players' behaviour very differently.
I still do.

It's not just sport, there is a cultural thing here. I am going to use two examples. Footie 1986, Argentina faces England. Maradona illegally uses his hand to score a goal.
Ask any english who was alive at the time who Ben Nassir is. 99% of them wouldn't have a clue (ref of that game).
Footie again, 1990, Argentina faces Germany. Rudy Voller dives and the refs call a penalty. Ask any argentine alive at the time and they will tell you the name of the ref was mexican edgardo codesal.
My point is that, within "footie culture"we live and we die by the same sword. We dont blame Voller for diving. We expected him to do so. We do blame the ref for falling for it.
Again, Voller's job was to win.
I dont want to get too technical, but it also has to do with the fact that lying in football has a relatively low punishment when compared to the potential reward.

One of the things i like rugby is that the best team wins the overwhelming majority of times.
One of the thing i love about footie is that the best teams lose a disproportionally amount of times. That's why cinderally stories are 10 times more common in football than in any other sport. Before you second guess this, think about it this way: In how many sports can the number 15-20 athlete/team in the world have a decent shot of beating #1? Not in rugby. Not in tennis. Not in basket. Not in Hockey. Not in ice-hockey. Not in baseball. Not in cricket. Not in F1. Not in 100mts. Not in high jump, long jump nor paul vault.
But it does happen in football. A lot. Part of the reason is football's unfair nature. There is quite a bit of it's defensive nature (low scoring sport, etc) too.

I guess i look for different things in each sport.
But i digress.
 
Oh that's why Argentines thought Maradona's use of hand to score was absolutely fine.:rolleyes:
 
To clarify my point on wanting the best team to win. I have no issue with smash and grab wins i.e. where a team/underdog has less possession or territory than their opponents but overcomes the odds with hard work, a heroic defensive effort or seizing rare opportunities and converting them into goals/points. Fairytale results such as this e.g. Japan beating South Africa at the last WC are what makes sport great IMO.
 
Oh that's why Argentines thought Maradona's use of hand to score was absolutely fine.:rolleyes:
At least we are not hypocrites who cried foul like a bunch of schoolgirls in 1986 but when the cheating goes your way, like it did in 2002, you conveniently keep your pie holes closed.

The saddest part is in 1986, we cheated and won. In 2002 you cheated and still lost. Remember that.

To clarify my point on wanting the best team to win. I have no issue with smash and grab wins i.e. where a team/underdog has less possession or territory than their opponents but overcomes the odds with hard work, a heroic defensive effort or seizing rare opportunities and converting them into goals/points. Fairytale results such as this e.g. Japan beating South Africa at the last WC are what makes sport great IMO.
I understand. But the rules of the game determine to a very large degree the odds of that fairytale happening. Most sports are designed for that not to happen. That is not the case with football.
The example you gave is a perfect one. Japan (top 10? at the time) beating RSA (top 3/4 at the time) is considered the biggest upset in rugby world cup history.
That is number 10 beating number 4. I can give you more extreme cases (bigger difference between the rankings of both teams ) in every single footie world cup i can think of. Just out of the top of my head:

2018: South Kor beating Germany
2014: Costa Rica beating Italy
2010: South Africa beating France
2006: Croatia eliminated after drawing with Australia
2002: Senegal beating France. Korea beating Italy. Korea beating Spain.
1998: Spain losing to Nigeria
1994: US beating Colombia. Italy losing to Ireland
1990: Cameroon beating Argentina
1986: Belgium beating Soviet Union
1982: Algeria beating Germany
1978: Peru beating Scotland

The point is that, by design, not by random chance, those results are quite common in one sport and one sport alone.
 
At least we are not hypocrites who cried foul like a bunch of schoolgirls in 1986 but when the cheating goes your way, like it did in 2002, you conveniently keep your pie holes closed.

The saddest part is in 1986, we cheated and won. In 2002 you cheated and still lost. Remember that.
.

Correction England won that game 1-0. And we are all hypocrites. But unlike Argentines we don't celebrate the cheating we own up to it. Argentines celebrate it as part and parcel of the game. It is not.
 

Latest posts

Top