Worse thing about modern football? The false 9. The classic No 9 is the lead Singer of a rock band. I grew up watching Van Basten, Bastituta, Shearer, Romario, Ronaldo, Ruud et al, and they were footballing gods. Playing without a no 9 is like listening to the Rolling Stones without Mick Jagger.
Things you really hate about the football/modern game
- Thread starter Stookie
- Start date
I don't give a toss how much players are paid but it seriously pisses me off when they don't earn it. All I ask is they put 100% into the 90+ minutes of a game...run your hearts out and stop fecking strolling around as if you don't care.
I also dislike linesmen who seem to miss blatant offences right under their fecking noses.
I also dislike linesmen who seem to miss blatant offences right under their fecking noses.
Over opinionated fans with zero patience
This makes zero sense. You actually think the false-9 is a modern invention? Or has increased much in popularity?
Last edited:
Media making a big story about nothing. Case in point: Rooney on the left.
Managers constantly blaming the ref for everything. So tedious.
This winds me up. Rugby players this and that. Like rugby players are amazing lads. They throw midgets punch and kick each other. Most of the players are fecking annoying as feck as well. Does my head in.
So when its a goal kick, is time still running or has it stopped?
Not modern per se but it has certainly increased in usage lately;
The diving, pretending to be injured and excessive swarming of referees to gain advantages. A clear dive should be a months ban in my eyes, if you get so badly injured you can't move you should be forced to substitute as if you are so badly injured you can't walk you must be severely injured. The dive should be judged by a video referee preferably as it is difficult for a regular referee to see it.
Also only captains should be allowed to talk to the referee except for the players involved in the accident. I.e if someone makes an ugly tackle only the two players involved and the captains should be allowed to engage in the situation. Any other player who walks up to the referee or in any way tries to influence the decision should get a yellow card right away. Just ruins football to see Barcelona swarm the referee without being punished at all.
The diving, pretending to be injured and excessive swarming of referees to gain advantages. A clear dive should be a months ban in my eyes, if you get so badly injured you can't move you should be forced to substitute as if you are so badly injured you can't walk you must be severely injured. The dive should be judged by a video referee preferably as it is difficult for a regular referee to see it.
Also only captains should be allowed to talk to the referee except for the players involved in the accident. I.e if someone makes an ugly tackle only the two players involved and the captains should be allowed to engage in the situation. Any other player who walks up to the referee or in any way tries to influence the decision should get a yellow card right away. Just ruins football to see Barcelona swarm the referee without being punished at all.
The inevitable close up of players (almost always RVP in United's case,) doing that thing where they pinch their nose and let fly. It's just not something I need to see.
Rugby players are no angels, and I'd never paint them in that manner. When it comes to respect for officials though, rugby players are miles better than their football counterparts.
The constant incorrect offside decisions that are awarded OR missed. I know human error is always going to happen. I just think there needs to be a little more accuracy.
Slow-mo replay montages of players' reactions and the subsequent "well those pictures tell their own story" despite most replays being wholly irrelevant to the narrative they've created
Time is still running. Not sure of the relevence, though?
Things I hate about football? FIFA exec committee, diving and agents. In that order
The fact they water the pitch so its pissing wet through even in summer.
24hr news coverage and twitter. I could do without the whole thing.
Far and away at number 1 is the total disregard of head injuries and concussions.
Sickeningly stuck in the dark age stuff.
Sickeningly stuck in the dark age stuff.
They're the lads at school that couldn't get on the school football team. Let the piss-drinking, vomit-eating rugby LADS have their glory on the Caf.
Cheating.
Diving, exaggerating injuries, flicking the ball at players' hands.
Sometimes they get away with and an innocent player in red carded or a team get s a pen or free kick.
Nothing you can do about wrong decisions but there should be a panel that watches the game after and gives points for players that cheat. Accumulate a certain number of points and you miss games.
Diving, exaggerating injuries, flicking the ball at players' hands.
Sometimes they get away with and an innocent player in red carded or a team get s a pen or free kick.
Nothing you can do about wrong decisions but there should be a panel that watches the game after and gives points for players that cheat. Accumulate a certain number of points and you miss games.
I won't say that's a problem with modern football, it's just that there is now more attention to it because we have the technology to capture the action at 10000 frames per second and replay it to millions of audience around the world.
If you watch the action without the benefit of slow-mo replays it would really be hard for you to get the call right, even when you have superior angle of view on TV. That's the reality that refs have to deal with.
The fact that news is centred around things like that ^
Utterly mental, brainwashed by the media, modern fans.
This isn't a problem with the modern game. If anything, it's improved a lot since the days of Jeff Astle.
I reckon that's mainly due to the fact that they actually get punished if they aren't.
Yes it is a problem with the modern game.
Watching Perreira play on with a blatant concussion the other day made me feel nauseous. Knowing what we know about concussions how on earth can that be acceptable? It's 2014 FFS.
Top players going to clubs for money. The fact is they're gonna make millions either way, just pure greed. (Hazard)
Revisionism.
Huh?
Concussions in football are extremely rare since the contacts are very soft most of the time. We could inventually create the temporary substitution, but player will comeback all the time,so what's the point.
And we know that heading the ball is bad for the brain, should we forbid it ?
Unfavourable comparison to rugby.
Sin bins. No dissent. Less play acting. All forgetting that rugby is shit.
Sin bins. No dissent. Less play acting. All forgetting that rugby is shit.
If a player is concussed from heading a ball, yes.
It's simple, if a player is concussed they leave the pitch and don't come back. They shouldn't be allowed to play again until they're fully recovered. It might take a week, it might take a month, it doesn't matter. No exceptions.
Rugby is really struggling with getting the balance right re concussions, so it takes a lot of thought to come up with the best way to police them. I do agree that it's absolutely crazy that you can see someone completely unconscious, only to get back on the pitch and continue playing. FIFA are supposed to have independent doctors at the side of the pitch, who can overrule decisions made by the team physios. He was negligent to let that guy play on.
I had concussions a dozen of times,and Pereira was fine, you don't run like a spring chicken after a concussion. He was hurting from the knock and a little bit dizzy, but that wasn't a proper concussion.
Here you have a proper concussion and a scandalous decision:
I'm not sure you understand how concussion is defined. Here's one definition:
He was definitely concussed, purely on the basis that he was knocked out.
By the way, feeling dizzy after a blow to the head would usually be considered concussion even if you don't actually lose consciousness.
It's not he joined QPR, is it? Chelsea are a club that win trophies.
I know how it is defined, but there is more than one symptoms and degrees in a concussion. A simple migraine after a header is symptom of concussion, and you don't stop a player for that, that's why there is protocols in sports who are much more violent like martial arts or Rugby.
Money was the biggest factor. Chelsea finished 6th that season, we were champions. We offered probably somewhere around 100k and Chelsea 200k plus their manager situation.
Every single one of those protocols will include "loss of consciousness" as a key criteria in deciding whether or not someone is concussed. If any player, in any sport, is knocked unconscious he should not be allowed to continue. You're right that there's shades of grey in assessing the severity/extent of a concussion but being KO'd is one aspect where the guidance is black and white. Look at the recent Froch fight, for example. The ref stopped counting as soon as it was obvious that Groves was unconscious even though he probably could have beaten a 10 count.
Here's a link to some guidance produced by the IRB. Any medic following this guidance wuld not have allowed Pereirra to continue playing.
http://www.irbplayerwelfare.com/?documentid=112
Football should produce something similar, or someone is going to get badly hurt.
http://group.bmj.com/group/media/la...follow-international-guidelines-on-concussion
Last edited:
You're forgetting the standing up in the washbasin wanking in front of a bunch of admirers.