Stoppage time
Things about football that get you unreasonably annoyed…
- Thread starter sugar_kane
- Start date
Fans who routinely refer to players by their first names.
Moving Champions League kick-off times from 7.45 to 8. It’s too late now!!!
Paul Merson opinions.
The endless whinging of Ajax supporters on the internet (mainly the Dutch forum I moderate) claiming that everyone is against them and that all the evil media pundits should stop being so negative towards them, because it's unfair and they are out to get them. Shut up whiny cnuts, your club gets like 80% of all football coverage either way, you're just shite now so instead of heaping praise upon you, it's a shower of shite now. Feck off.
No offense to our resident Ajax caftards, I love you all. cnuts.
No offense to our resident Ajax caftards, I love you all. cnuts.
Yes. The second half has more subs, normally more goals, and more time wasting.
It’s because their name is Sporting and they play in Lisbon. Just “Sporting” was (and for many people is) too generic, so Lisbon was added for clarification. There’s no ignorance or offence around it.
Pretty sure you mean United fans.
Most big club fans are probably quite similar, however I hardly read the United forum so I wouldn't know.
First team players wearing daft numbers above 30. Arseholes.
Yeah, or when they wear a number that doesn’t match their position just be a bit edgy. Like when Gallas wore no. 10 at Arsenal, or Bendtner wearing no. 3 at Wolfsburg.
Erikson, Erickson, Bruno Fernandez, Anthony, Pellestri, Johnny Evans, Van Der Sar, Van De Beek etc.
Last edited:
Even worse; players with their first names on the back. Hate it.
The term Daytrippers.
Boils my blood.
Boils my blood.
Fans and pundits who refer to players or managers with matey nicknames. "Big Sam". "Pep". Pep. Do you know him or something? "Wazza, JT, Lamps" etc. Feck off.
I used to work with an a city fan who just talked about them all fecking day long (and somehow managed to mention 'yoonighted' in every other sentence as well). He used to have pet nicknames for all the players. "Zabzi" was Zabaletta for example. When he wasn't doing that, he called them all by their first names, like he knew them personally. It sickened me. Lovely guy aside from that, but I was glad when he retired and I didn't have to listen to that all day
I used to work with an a city fan who just talked about them all fecking day long (and somehow managed to mention 'yoonighted' in every other sentence as well). He used to have pet nicknames for all the players. "Zabzi" was Zabaletta for example. When he wasn't doing that, he called them all by their first names, like he knew them personally. It sickened me. Lovely guy aside from that, but I was glad when he retired and I didn't have to listen to that all day
When a team trailing in a match scores a goal and makes a big show out of trying to grab the ball out of the net and run back to the centre circle with it. Even more dickish if that causes them to have handbags with the opposition goalkeeper in the process.
What the feck does that ever achieve? It doesn't make the game restart any faster. It's absolutely pointless and just done for show.
What the feck does that ever achieve? It doesn't make the game restart any faster. It's absolutely pointless and just done for show.
Footballers who cut holes in the back of their socks.
Clubs playing those on bail for being serial rapists.
Martin Ødegaard's face.
Low socks.
Intentional fouls that stop counters. Punishing them with yellows would lead to far better games.
Being shit for 10 years
Mikel Arteta.
Players who wear longsleeve spandex shirts underneath their shortsleeve kits. Looks absolutely ridiculous. Just wear a longsleeve kit if you're cold.
Also, players like Shaw and Grealish who wear their socks super low- this might actually look ever more ridiculous than the shirt stuff.
Also, players like Shaw and Grealish who wear their socks super low- this might actually look ever more ridiculous than the shirt stuff.
Starting lineup being put in ascending order based on the number BUT the GK because the GK is always on the top.
Youre not even consistent with the ordering ya daft mathematician wannabes, just put them based on their position what are you trying to find? the golden ratio or summat? Put them in this order: GK, Defenders, Midfielders, Attackers. Is that hard??
Youre not even consistent with the ordering ya daft mathematician wannabes, just put them based on their position what are you trying to find? the golden ratio or summat? Put them in this order: GK, Defenders, Midfielders, Attackers. Is that hard??
Lexus stoppage time for those of us in the States
Keepers being mandated to stay on their line during a pen. Joke.
What would you consider a fair distance for them to be away from the goal line when the penalty is taken?
One natural step. They can't charge out but Christ, having to be on the line is yet another manufacturing of goals to provide entertainment for fans.
How would the referees judge what is a natural step? Or how would it be stated in the rules of the game? And actually they are allowed to take that step as it is. As long as the trailing foot is on the line.
I kind of disagree. The way Tim Krul for example saved penalties before the rule change was ridiculous.
Last edited:
That United isn’t anywhere near a football team anymore. It’s a full blow docusoap.
Players who give daft fouls away especially when a player is under pressure in their own half. Though most of them are dives and the refs always gives the freekick
Offside rule. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I would like to see how football looks without it, at least an an experiment. Think rules should make it easier for offense to score goals. Make it harder for the defenders(and their positioning), and we'll get less boring 0-0 or games with little to no chances - more excitement. I understand somewhat why that rule exists, but it's always annoyed me and I celebrated many goals prematurely because of it. I would modify it somehow it just so you can't crowd the goal line, goalkeeper area in general and especially during set pieces. Basically make a relatively small area around goalkeeper(goal line) where offside would still exists and goalkeepers more protected. All other types of offside I would remove.
That concept doesn't exist in some other sports with two "goal like structures" and concept of scoring a goal or something similar like a basket or touchdown. Basketball, handball, waterpolo, American football(NFL)...I've heard some version of offside exists in ice hockey, but not in field hockey. I don't know about rugby or Australian football, don't watch these sports either(as i don't hockey).
That concept doesn't exist in some other sports with two "goal like structures" and concept of scoring a goal or something similar like a basket or touchdown. Basketball, handball, waterpolo, American football(NFL)...I've heard some version of offside exists in ice hockey, but not in field hockey. I don't know about rugby or Australian football, don't watch these sports either(as i don't hockey).
Quite easily. Plus, the attacker has a free shot into 220sqm of space from twelve yards. They can kick a ball upwards of 60mph, the keeper has the tiniest reaction time possible yet we need to give the attackers MORE of an advantage? Behave.
39 matches in the league so far this season and none of them have been 0-0. Going further, only seven of those games have had only one goal. I understand wanting to see what football would be like without offsides but we don't need it for more goals, football in England is fine without more attacking advantages. People forget that defending is an art in itself.
There are definitely versions of "offside" in American football and rugby. The former, you have to start behind/on the line of the ball at the start of the down and in rugby you need to pass the ball to a person behind you. Both different but stop the idea of "goal hanging"
Doesn't really answer the question for me. A "natural step" leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Which leads to controversial decisions, which we have enough of in the game as it stands, in my opinion.
It's also called a penalty for a reason. There's supposed to be consequences for committing a foul inside your own box.
It's one foot behind the line, you can step the other foot forward
Should be a threshold because teams just use different players to stop counters, first two from any player should be yellows, next one from any player on that team should be an automatic red. City would be in league 2 if they actually had to do some defending instead of just cheating with fouls.
Ok, about rugby you're right, I actually remembered it when you mentioned because someone did told me about that rule once, long time ago, even though I don't watch the sport.
But comparing "offside" in American football(which I watch, occasionally) to offside in football(soccer) is absolutely ridiculous, in my opinion. If a wide receiver wasn't allowed to be ahead(closer to the opponents end zone, equivalent of a goal in football) of a safety or cornerback(which guards him man to man or zone coverage, irrelevant...) when quarterback throws him the ball, that would be an offside comparable to offside in football and would make life for the offenses drastically harder. Sport would suffer, I think(viewership, popularity...). Many iconic deep touchdowns(35+ yards) would be just erased from existence(overturned).
Every down in the NFL is like starting the half from center of the pitch in football, because football is a continuous, fluid sport without many interruptions(time flows constantly, it's never stopped), while American football is constantly restarting positions of all players by changing the famous "line of scrimmage" which separates offense and defense after every down. You can't possibly compare line of scrimmage in the NFL to the offside line in football, I think it's foolish(don't wanna offend you, sorry if I did...).
Last edited:
People who quote their own posts on football forums.