Today’s Football 25/26 Season

I'm not sure that I get the implicit anti-Arsenal/pro-City rhetoric around refereeing this weekend. As anti-football as Arsenal are, they are by far and away the best of a bad bunch up there for me. Much rather them than the RS, Chelsea's venture capitalism or Jim Ratcliffe's send-them-down-the-mines brand of sportswashing. City arguably play the nicer football but people forget that before January they couldn't score goals and were shipping them for fun, then went out and bought the best centre half in the league and the second top scorer with the money that they have cooked up from 15 years of corrupt accounting. Yuck, no thanks.

So yeah let's all join in the SKY-Sponsored debate about VAR in the West Ham game and the pushing and shoving at corners, and the micro managing of decisions, but please remember nothing happened in the City game because, well we'd quite like to roll out the red carpet so that they can waltz to yet another league title off the back of 115 unanswered charges. The mind boggles
 
Wait, so you do think Silva should have been sent off?
I think if every push, shove, lean, shoulder barge in the back, shirt pull, arm tug, palm off, hip throw, jumping-player-leg-clean-out, is punished, no game would get past 20 minutes.

The problem is the application, either it is a contact sport or its not. The var issue of dragging the video back over a minute to find a foul to over rule a goal is another abomination.

West ham will have to cut staff and contracts and curtail transfer spending as well as possibly have to sell a few star players. There'll be bleating galore. But they weren't bothered when they fielded tevez and mascherano against the rules and stayed up at sheff utd's expense.

Either the rules are for everyone, or the rules are for no one. The ambiguity and preferential treatment is why so many are switching off.
 
What's the point, the logic of the question is so deeply flawed

Suggest you look up false equivalence, might help you with your critical thinking going forward. There's quite a lot of long and complicated words in here though, so suggest you use your theasaurus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

Pushing someone with your forearm with a clenched fist = apparently the clenched fist is important.

Pushing someone with your forearm whilst doing a peace sign = won't answer the question because you know it's not actually important.
 
I think if every push, shove, lean, shoulder barge in the back, shirt pull, arm tug, palm off, hip throw, jumping-player-leg-clean-out, is punished, no game would get past 20 minutes.

The problem is the application, either it is a contact sport or its not. The var issue of dragging the video back over a minute to find a foul to over rule a goal is another abomination.

West ham will have to cut staff and contracts and curtail transfer spending as well as possibly have to sell a few star players. There'll be bleating galore. But they weren't bothered when they fielded tevez and mascherano against the rules and stayed up at sheff utd's expense.

Either the rules are for everyone, or the rules are for no one. The ambiguity and preferential treatment is why so many are switching off.
But the Silva incident was none of these things?

And yes, it's a contact sport and for disclosure I am completely on your side, I find like you that the game has been completely over sanitised. I've had enough of defenders or attackers waiting for contact, going down, holding the ball, and getting a guaranteed free kick.

But in this incident the sport wasn't being played, it was having a break, the ball was dead. Not sure you can lash out at someone when the ball is dead and argue against punishment on the grounds that the game is going soft
 
Pushing someone with your forearm with a clenched fist = apparently the clenched fist is important.

Pushing someone with your forearm whilst doing a peace sign = won't answer the question because you know it's not actually important.
I think if people are getting sent off for pulling hair,Silva absolutely should have saw red for punching the Brentford defender in the leg.

Thats just my tenpenth.
 
But the Silva incident was none of these things?

And yes, it's a contact sport and for disclosure I am completely on your side, I find like you that the game has been completely over sanitised. I've had enough of defenders or attackers waiting for contact, going down, holding the ball, and getting a guaranteed free kick.

But in this incident the sport wasn't being played, it was having a break, the ball was dead. Not sure you can lash out at someone when the ball is dead and argue against punishment on the grounds that the game is going soft
The vid doesn't show he was or wasnt stood on.

he'd argue the player was backing into him whilst he lay on the floor so pushed out to defend himself. if he'd stuck a spinning backfist on the bridge of his nose, i'd have served his community service for him.

this season has seen the dead ball process extorted. the authorities haven't kept up so more liberties have been taken. that is why the standard of football has dropped, play for the free kick or corner and start up the rugby scrum stuff. why kill yourself trying to beat a man or find an overlap when the fix is in with the referee anyway? see the penalty we were denied on barry vs arsenal. "kick out if you want, no punishment vs everton lads!"

the system is flawed because the self imposed authorities are flawed. similar to the water industry, they're marking their own homework, keep the money rolling in thanks very much.

keane and vieira got fruity many years ago in the tunnel before the ball had ever gone live. the ball doesn't matter, when its time for a ruck do as much harm as you can.

the current farce is beyond parody. no wonder so many people despise football. it sucks!
 
Pushing someone with your forearm with a clenched fist = apparently the clenched fist is important.

Pushing someone with your forearm whilst doing a peace sign = won't answer the question because you know it's not actually important.
Hitting someone with your forearm, but your fist is clenched - sign of intent, likely attempt to punch the person, cause more harm - therefore relevant given the written rules of the game.

Hitting someone with your forearm, but you're making a peace sign - suggests that in fact you are an advocate of pacifism, and should be awarded the nobel peace price.

Given the levels of maturity in your reasoning, let me explain it to you like I would my 2 year old nephew.

What you're doing here is this:
Thing 1 and thing 2 both share characteristic A.
Therefore, things 1 and 2 are equal.

But here's the thing. Thing 1 actually happened in reality. Thing 2 never would, because why in the hell would anyone do that.
 
Hitting someone with your forearm, but your fist is clenched - sign of intent, likely attempt to punch the person, cause more harm - therefore relevant given the written rules of the game.

Hitting someone with your forearm, but you're making a peace sign - suggests that in fact you are an advocate of pacifism, and should be awarded the nobel peace price.

Given the levels of maturity in your reasoning, let me explain it to you like I would my 2 year old nephew.

What you're doing here is this:
Thing 1 and thing 2 both share characteristic A.
Therefore, things 1 and 2 are equal.

But here's the thing. Thing 1 actually happened in reality. Thing 2 never would, because why in the hell would anyone do that.

If you go to punch someone, you punch them, you don't hit them with the side of your arm, unless you're suggesting he's just incredibly bad at punching?

You're falling apart badly here, by the way.
 
Hitting someone with your forearm, but your fist is clenched - sign of intent, likely attempt to punch the person, cause more harm - therefore relevant given the written rules of the game.

Hitting someone with your forearm, but you're making a peace sign - suggests that in fact you are an advocate of pacifism, and should be awarded the nobel peace price.

Given the levels of maturity in your reasoning, let me explain it to you like I would my 2 year old nephew.

What you're doing here is this:
Thing 1 and thing 2 both share characteristic A.
Therefore, things 1 and 2 are equal.

But here's the thing. Thing 1 actually happened in reality. Thing 2 never would, because why in the hell would anyone do that.
"I made a fist with my hand your honour because if I'd had my fingers spread the chances are I'd have blinded him on the contact we'd inevitably make" ?
 
If you go to punch someone, you punch them, you don't hit them with the side of your arm, unless you're suggesting he's just incredibly bad at punching?

You're falling apart badly here, by the way.
No, no, just off balance and facing the other way. He lashed out behind him didn't he, took a swing and hoped he made contact. The point is is that it was a strike, not a shove, and the clenched fist forms part of the evidence that demonstrates that... therefore triggering the threshold for violent conduct and a straight red card.

Think you're losing sight a little of what I am arguing for here. I'm not saying that what Silva did was a heinous act of bodily harm and he should be tried in a court of law. I'm saying that, according with the action, the mitigating factors and by the laws of the game, that's a red card in my opinion. But I've said it before and I'll say it again - you seem to disagree with that interpretation and that's fine. I know that you don't agree with me about, well, pretty much anything I say on here.

And again; there just isn't any need for the demeaning, arrogant and provocative semi-personal jibes is there? But I've pulled you up on that before. I think you get quite the enjoyment out of it
 
No, no, just off balance and facing the other way. He lashed out behind him didn't he, took a swing and hoped he made contact. The point is is that it was a strike, not a shove, and the clenched fist forms part of the evidence that demonstrates that... therefore triggering the threshold for violent conduct and a straight red card.

Think you're losing sight a little of what I am arguing for here. I'm not saying that what Silva did was a heinous act of bodily harm and he should be tried in a court of law. I'm saying that, according with the action, the mitigating factors and by the laws of the game, that's a red card in my opinion. But I've said it before and I'll say it again - you seem to disagree with that interpretation and that's fine. I know that you don't agree with me about, well, pretty much anything I say on here.

And again; there just isn't any need for the demeaning, arrogant and provocative semi-personal jibes is there? But I've pulled you up on that before. I think you get quite the enjoyment out of it

I'm very concerned about how you would punch someone if the moment ever arose is the last thing I will say here.

Wasn't a red, VAR said it wasn't a red, rest of the world didn't think it was a red, just you apparently.

Also LOL at the bold, the irony, you literally accused me of being stupid and needing a thesaurus earlier???
 
I just don't get the logic that because we (wrongly) didn't get the decision when Pablo fouled Pickford, then that means that they also shouldn't have given it today. That would by definition also be wrong, so are we now saying that consistent errors across the board is better? Yes, we should have got that decision, but it was also right to give it today if the incidents were pretty much the same.

50% right is no good, but 100% wrong is worse.

You could probably go find 100 corners in no time at all this season where players are not even paying attention to the ball but dragging each other to the ground and VAR havent even got involved. If they're ignoring that and disallowing that yesterday they may as well chalk off 95% of goals from corners.
The objective of this crap thing was for clear and obvious errors. Instead its now gone to their head and they are shaping results and teams seasons.
Fans now talk just as much about VAR as the actual football. And i think the PGMOL love it. I've always thought most refs are people who wanted limelight but weren't talented enough players/actors. VAR Is providing that.
 

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top