• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

FIFA: Destroying Football Since 1904

DeanoAustin said:
I'm not one for conspiracy theories but...

Think it absolutely makes you wonder a bit more about some of the bizarre decisions that host countries have had the benefit of in previous World Cups. Those who think 2022 was rigged for Messi now have some more ammunition. This is the first time we've seen it being done so openly.

If the US get any beneficial decisions from here, people are going to cry foul...and you couldn't blame them.

This is genuinely an absolute head scratcher. Breathtaking really.
Click to expand...

Re the 2022 World Cup, Argentina got some soft penalties but nothing out of the ordinary, certainly not enough to make me think it was rigged for Messi to win it. If Kolo Muani finishes that chance in extra time then Argentina most likely lose the match.
 
Jurgen the German said:
Re the 2022 World Cup, Argentina got some soft penalties but nothing out of the ordinary, certainly not enough to make me think it was rigged for Messi to win it. If Kolo Muani finishes that chance in extra time then Argentina most likely lose the match.
Click to expand...
I don't for one second believe that 2022 was rigged. Not in a million years.

However, 2002 (South Korea) and 1978 (Argentina)...there is probably a bit more weight behind those accusations.
 
revlis said:
A player missing a match because of a bad decision happens fairly regularly. What doesn't happen is the government of the country intervening to ensure he can play. It makes a mockery of the game and the tournament. It's an absolute joke of a decision and how anyone could possibly defend it, regardless of the actual decision during the match, is beyond me.

I hope he plays and Belgium fudging spank them.
Click to expand...

Maybe this will be the wake up call that the game needs to stop allowing completely dumb VAR controversies to happen. They have the technology, and they have all the time they need to make sure that they get decisions right, and apply the rules consistently. These refs and VARs keep failing to do so.

I think it is completely grubby what Trump and FIFA have done. I don’t like to see my football competition’s compromised this way. But this is not the decision that exemplifies it. Messi staying on, and Ronaldo having his ban suspended should be equally as egregious to people upset by this. FIFA are trying to make as many money as possible out of this World Cup. It means hydration breaks, ad revenue, and it means viewers. They went their best players on the pitch, and they’ve decided money is more important than pure sporting integrity. So it puts paid to the idea that the Portuguese FA are going to ‘stand with Belgium / UEFA’ against FIFA. Equally, we’ve seen Starmer get involved to get the kick off back in its original spot, and Mexico seemingly try and game the system to their own advantage too. It is all horribly grubby, but that seems to be the game at the very top in this day and age.

However, I’m more angry at the application of VAR than I am with FIFA. I’m seeing a lot of ‘this is just football, we all accept it’ when players have to deal with unjust cards. But the game needs to be better in this era. We can’t keep getting this stuff wrong. The player doesn’t deserve to miss out on a match at a tournament that comes around every 4 years because officials who don’t play the game made an idiotic decision.

It is completely grubby. But if it takes Trump throwing his weight around to start getting consistency and common sense applied to the application of VAR, then good. These dumb decisions that ruin football matches need to stop.
 
Lost Mango said:
yes it would be fair because that is football. Thousands of wrong decisions every year in all leagues, high and low that impact leagues and cup competitions. None of them are reviewed and suspended (note, the offence was accepted to have happened and if he does it again he will incur the penalty, not that the offence was overturned).

Balogun stepped on someone else's heel, foot up studs first. Ref looked at it on VAR and called it. That should have been the end of it.

So many players miss out over a wrong yellow card that leads to an accumulated suspension or a wrong call. Others get away with it. Just life. Why should one case get exceptional, and this is totally exceptional, treatment and every other case just be left on merit?? The joy of football is that it should be a level playing field at each level. This shows it isn't.

FIFA are wrong to get involved. USA and Pochettino should not select him but will.
Click to expand...

I think it hasn’t been rescinded because FIFA doesn’t have a process for that at this tournament. I am unsure why. But they chose this article 27 thing because it gives them legal cover. Rescinding the card would have left them open.

Balogun did step on someone else’s heel. It’s really unfortunate and would have been painful for the Bosnia player. But surely serious foul play has to have a higher standard than this? It wasn’t just a lack of intent, it was an inability to put his foot on the floor, because the Bosnia guy and he got tangled. There’s nothing else he could have done. It’s unfortunate but I think it’s nonsense that this gets given as a red card.

I even thought Quansah’s was harsh. It was a wet pitch, and the ball basically propelled him further forward into the Mexican player. Also thought he got there easily first and the Mexico player sort of stuck his leg in. But, I get why, even though there was no intent from Quansah, he still could have done something else. Unfortunately his studs were up, and he chose to make that sort of tackle, and it ends up being a dangerous looking tackle. I get it.

But this idea of being able to slow down frame by frame to prove that a player’s studs were in the other guys ankle just needs to stop. I’d say that if England / Spurs were benefiting or whether we aren’t. It’s not even just about intent, and my point is the standard needs to be ‘could the player have reasonably done anything else’ and if so, I don’t think the punishment needs to be as hard as a red. So it will be rarer that it isn’t a red even under my bar, but I still think the application of the rules just needs to be better. VAR is getting involved in things it just shouldn’t be in, and bringing an impossible standard that players won’t be able to meet much of the time.
 
I’ve just watched the Balogun moment again…it literally all happened in maybe less than 2 seconds…and yet on VAR it’s made to look like he deliberately stamps his foot in once he realises he has the opportunity to do it. It happens so quickly, and he cannot do anything else. We need common sense.

It is mad that Trump getting involved has led the the common sense outcome. But I think that says just as much about VAR as it does about him.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
I think it hasn’t been rescinded because FIFA doesn’t have a process for that at this tournament. I am unsure why. But they chose this article 27 thing because it gives them legal cover. Rescinding the card would have left them open.

Balogun did step on someone else’s heel. It’s really unfortunate and would have been painful for the Bosnia player. But surely serious foul play has to have a higher standard than this? It wasn’t just a lack of intent, it was an inability to put his foot on the floor, because the Bosnia guy and he got tangled. There’s nothing else he could have done. It’s unfortunate but I think it’s nonsense that this gets given as a red card.

I even thought Quansah’s was harsh. It was a wet pitch, and the ball basically propelled him further forward into the Mexican player. Also thought he got there easily first and the Mexico player sort of stuck his leg in. But, I get why, even though there was no intent from Quansah, he still could have done something else. Unfortunately his studs were up, and he chose to make that sort of tackle, and it ends up being a dangerous looking tackle. I get it.

But this idea of being able to slow down frame by frame to prove that a player’s studs were in the other guys ankle just needs to stop. I’d say that if England / Spurs were benefiting or whether we aren’t. It’s not even just about intent, and my point is the standard needs to be ‘could the player have reasonably done anything else’ and if so, I don’t think the punishment needs to be as hard as a red. So it will be rarer that it isn’t a red even under my bar, but I still think the application of the rules just needs to be better. VAR is getting involved in things it just shouldn’t be in, and bringing an impossible standard that players won’t be able to meet much of the time.
Click to expand...

A player's primary responsibility on the pitch is not to hurt another player. If you end up stamping on someone else's ankle you either did it on purpose, or you didn't purposefully avoid doing it, either way I think that should be a red card, being out of control is what is dangerous, intentional or not.

I think in both those examples the answer to your question is yes, the player could reasonably have done something else, not gone for the ball in that instance.

I think frame by frames are good, based on my criteria above, if your studs are on another players ankle for even a fraction of second you have been careless and shouldn't be on the pitch.

Both of those examples could easily have resulted in serious injury, thats why they need to be punished, as a deterrent for the future.
 
Last edited:
Baleforce said:
A player's primary responsibility on the pitch is not to hurt another player. If you end up stamping on someone else's ankle you either did it on purpose, or you didn't purposefully avoid doing it, either way I think that should be a red card, being out of control is what is dangerous, intentional or not.

I think in both those examples the answer to your question is yes, the player could reasonably have done something else, not gone for the ball in that instance.

I think frame by frames are good, based on my criteria above, if your studs are on another players ankle for even a fraction of second you have been careless and shouldn't be on the pitch.

Both of those examples could easily have resulted in serious injury, thats why they need to be punished, as a deterrent for the future.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with your general point, and that’s why I can see that Quansah’s is a red that wouldn’t be overturned.

What else could Balogun have done though? 1. This is a contact sport and they were fighting for the ball. 2. The Bosnia player comes into the back of him. The action basically takes about a second. Balogun was putting his foot down to stand. He surely has to be allowed to that?

Just watch it again in real time. With everything moving that quickly, and with the Bosnia player also moving (and so Balogun cannot predict exactly where his foot will be) what else is he supposed to do?
 
Balogun simply isn’t ’out of control’ in any sense of the word. He’s trying to get in front of the Bosnia player to hold up the ball. The Bosnia player is trying to get there first. They were both committed. It’s unfortunate and will have hurt. But that is literally football.

Quansah put himself in a position where the rain and the momentum allowed him to be ‘out of control’. Balogun just didn’t.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
I totally agree with your general point, and that’s why I can see that Quansah’s is a red that wouldn’t be overturned.

What else could Balogun have done though? 1. This is a contact sport and they were fighting for the ball. 2. The Bosnia player comes into the back of him. The action basically takes about a second. Balogun was putting his foot down to stand. He surely has to be allowed to that?

Just watch it again in real time. With everything moving that quickly, and with the Bosnia player also moving (and so Balogun cannot predict exactly where his foot will be) what else is he supposed to do?
Click to expand...

Don't go in if you are not 100% of doing so safely.

Look at the freeze frame of the Bosnian ankle, you have to give a red card for that, there is no excuse.

No way it was intentional, but you still have to punish it.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
Balogun simply isn’t ’out of control’ in any sense of the word. He’s trying to get in front of the Bosnia player to hold up the ball. The Bosnia player is trying to get there first. They were both committed. It’s unfortunate and will have hurt. But that is literally football.

Quansah put himself in a position where the rain and the momentum allowed him to be ‘out of control’. Balogun just didn’t.
Click to expand...

He's out of control in every sense, else he would have put his foot down not on that other lads ankle.
 
Baleforce said:
Look at the freeze frame of the Bosnian ankle, you have to give a red card for that, there is no excuse.

No way it was intentional, but you still have to punish it.
Click to expand...

Well that’s my whole issue and we can agree to disagree on that. If you’re only looking at the freeze frame then yes it’s terrible. But if you look at it in real time it’s just two players fighting for the ball, in a contact sport, and something unfortunate happened. That’s my view. I don’t see why that has to be a red.

Is there anything that can happen on the football pitch in this context sport that wouldn’t be a red if the freeze frame suggested it looked bad in your view? I’m genuinely curious. I just think there are some instances, and they will be rare, where it’s just way out of proportion to punish the player with a sensing off. A booking and a directive to be careful sure. But sending off and suspension for something he couldn’t help, because the Bosnia player was sticking his foot in as much as he was? Just seems way over the top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back