England | Page 2 | Vital Football

England

That's because you're like a Bubble and rules are just an irrelevance to you.
I disagree, some of the rule changes appear to be for the sake of change and do not benefit the style or flow of the game. Look at the handball change - it must be awful for the referee to interpret whether the hand/arm was in a natural position or not.
 
I disagree, some of the rule changes appear to be for the sake of change and do not benefit the style or flow of the game. Look at the handball change - it must be awful for the referee to interpret whether the hand/arm was in a natural position or not.
Why on earth would they implement something 'for the sake of change'. What an absurd comment. They are clearly TRYING to improve things. Wether they achieve that is another matter. The handball law clearly hasnt improved matters. They have simply made a mistake. These things happen.
 
I disagree, some of the rule changes appear to be for the sake of change and do not benefit the style or flow of the game. Look at the handball change - it must be awful for the referee to interpret whether the hand/arm was in a natural position or not.

That wasn't a comment about the rules. It was a comment about my mate Rotherhithe's view of rules which, without knowing him personally, you'd be hard pressed to disagree with, although anythings possible on here; black being white and similar.
 
When I qualified as a referee. a long time ago. Deliberate handball was judged quite simply, by the ref deciding whether it was ball to hand (accidental handball no foul) or hand to ball (foul). The key part of the laws was the phrase 'in the opinion of the referee'. There will always be above average and below average referees, but VAR is a step too far.
 
That wasn't a comment about the rules. It was a comment about my mate Rotherhithe's view of rules which, without knowing him personally, you'd be hard pressed to disagree with, although anythings possible on here; black being white and similar.
Apologies WGUAFC I obviously misinterpreted your comment
 
When I qualified as a referee. a long time ago. Deliberate handball was judged quite simply, by the ref deciding whether it was ball to hand (accidental handball no foul) or hand to ball (foul). The key part of the laws was the phrase 'in the opinion of the referee'. There will always be above average and below average referees, but VAR is a step too far.

I knew a ref who once told me he adjudged a handball to be where, in his opinion, a player either deliberately put his hand or arm in the way of the ball or the ball hit his hand or arm and the player had time to clearly get his arm or hand out of the way. Always sounded sensible to me.
 
I knew a ref who once told me he adjudged a handball to be where, in his opinion, a player either deliberately put his hand or arm in the way of the ball or the ball hit his hand or arm and the player had time to clearly get his arm or hand out of the way. Always sounded sensible to me.
I played in a team with a one-armed half back. He was penalised when he hit the ball with his loose sleeve. When we appealed, the ref said the player put a lot of force into his sleeve. I have a feeling that the VAR ref wouldhave agreed with him.

Apart from the one-armed half back, we had a centre forward with one testicle and a goal keeper with a glass eye.
 
I played in a team with a one-armed half back. He was penalised when he hit the ball with his loose sleeve. When we appealed, the ref said the player put a lot of force into his sleeve. I have a feeling that the VAR ref wouldhave agreed with him.

Apart from the one-armed half back, we had a centre forward with one testicle and a goal keeper with a glass eye.

Wayne, whether this post is true or not it made me laugh!