Women's football show the men up!

[ABC (A Basingstoke Canary) 26]

Watching the opening game of the Womens World cup match between France & S Korea, I was struck by one of the commentators comments (Sue Smith?) following some dissent from a Korean player. She said that was very unusual in the women's game as they normally DON'T argue with the officials and that they also DON'T dive!. The lack of histrionics in the women's game made it an enjoyable and flowing match to watch.

Oh that the men's game could learn from the women's game on how to behave and by not trying to cheat at every opportunity. Wishful thinking I know! Quite amazing that the women have shown the men up in what most men consider to be "their" game.

[ThorpeCanary 71]

Interesting that your example of showing the men up is a game in which there was in fact dissent shown towards the official? There's definitely games ruined by play acting in the men's games but if I were to consider all of Norwich's games last season i'd argue the majority of them took place with little nonsense at all. People just seem to think it happens all the time - it doesn't

That said It will be interesting how VAR changes behaviour in the game going forward and likewise as the profile and stakes rise of the women's game improve whether we do start seeing more gamesmanship than we have in the past

[Crafty Canary 495]

The skills levels in the women's game is very high however I miss the physicality of the men's game. I agree it would be much better if players accepted the officials' decisions and the men's game could certainly learn something from both codes of rugby. Mind you, I don't think it is likely that referees will be called sir as is common in rugby at all levels.

[lake district canary 4,531]

1 hour ago, ThorpeCanary said:

That said It will be interesting how VAR changes behaviour in the game going forward and likewise as the profile and stakes rise of the women's game improve whether we do start seeing more gamesmanship than we have in the past

I found that VAR incident quite bizzarre. So for a fraction of a second the forward's left foot was one inch in front for the last defender.  In normal circumstances that would look like a good goal with the forward being given the benefit of the doubt. 

The offside rule needs changing so that more of the body has to be behind the last defender, like the chest for instance. So technically that incident was offside, but in reality the bodies of the defender and the forward were in line.

 

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

13 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

I found that VAR incident quite bizzarre. So for a fraction of a second the forward's left foot was one inch in front for the last defender.  In normal circumstances that would look like a good goal with the forward being given the benefit of the doubt. 

The offside rule needs changing so that more of the body has to be behind the last defender, like the chest for instance. So technically that incident was offside, but in reality the bodies of the defender and the forward were in line.

 

VAR will change so many things in football. Leagues where it has been introduced have seen a reduction in diving, but big increases in goals disallowed for marginal offsides and handball penalties. 

I we will gradually see rule changes come in to reflect VAR and how it has changed the game. I suspect with the offside rule it will move to where there has to be clear daylight between attacker and defender - this would be pretty impossible to judge with the human eye, but VAR should allow this to be possible. There are obvious issues when VAR isn’t available, but this was always going to happen with its introduction.  

It seems the fact VAR should only overrule the ref when there is a ‘clear and obvious’ mistake still isn’t really being applied. The Lingard goal should have been given if you apply that theory. 

 

[BroadstairsR 2,137]

"It seems the fact VAR should only overrule the ref when there is a ‘clear and obvious’ mistake still isn’t really being applied. The Lingard goal should have been given if you apply that theory." 

I agree with that fully.

I am a great enthusiast for VAR ... if we have the technology then use it. Humans are fallible, decisions can have massive implications.

The implementation of VAR must now be brought under the spotlight, and as soon as possible.

Who sat in the stands and made the Lingaard decision? I am not up with this to be honest, but immediately suspected a hint of bias being involved.

In cricket the original umpire's ruling stands for such marginal decisions and perhaps this should be the case with football. Technology is not perfect either, or rather a person's reading of it, especially where every split second matters.

Edited June 8, 2019 by BroadstairsR

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

13 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

VAR will change so many things in football. Leagues where it has been introduced have seen a reduction in diving, but big increases in goals disallowed for marginal offsides and handball penalties. 

I we will gradually see rule changes come in to reflect VAR and how it has changed the game. I suspect with the offside rule it will move to where there has to be clear daylight between attacker and defender - this would be pretty impossible to judge with the human eye, but VAR should allow this to be possible. There are obvious issues when VAR isn’t available, but this was always going to happen with its introduction.  

It seems the fact VAR should only overrule the ref when there is a ‘clear and obvious’ mistake still isn’t really being applied. The Lingard goal should have been given if you apply that theory. 

 

I dont know how you can apply the 'clear and obvious mistake' rule to to offside?

If every goal is checked by VAR then an offside will be flagged up as matter of fact?..rather like goal line tech signalling whether a ball has crossed the line or not , a player is either offside or he isnt?

 

[BroadstairsR 2,137]

" ..... a player is either offside or he isnt?"

 

One would hope so, but the Lingaard decision is still being debated, even with the benefit of VAR.

Is the thickness of a sheet of paper enough to deny a perfectly worked and executed goal in the context of the beautiful game?

[lake district canary 4,531]

VAR reminds me of speed cameras - they take no account of anything other than a spilt second of time.  By the letter of the law you can be in the wrong, but in reality, going down an empty road with nothing in sight at 63 insted of 60 is not the same as someone recklessly going along a busy road at 80. 

So being offside or not offside becomes a thing of computerised camera technology......yes I know speeding is speeding and offside is offside.......but as Bethnal says, the offside rule will need to change, because it will get to the stage where a camera might show a player a finger offside, or even a hair! 

Last night's non-goal was a terrific bit of play and deserved a goal all day long, but.....and it took them an age to decide......they managed to find something wrong with it.  Rule change definitely needed.  

 

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

1 minute ago, lake district canary said:

VAR reminds me of speed cameras - they take no account of anything other than a spilt second of time.  By the letter of the law you can be in the wrong, but in reality, going down an empty road with nothing in sight at 63 insted of 60 is not the same as someone recklessly going along a busy road at 80. 

So being offside or not offside becomes a thing of computerised camera technology......yes I know speeding is speeding and offside is offside.......but as Bethnal says, the offside rule will need to change, because it will get to the stage where a camera might show a player a finger offside, or even a hair! 

Last night's non-goal was a terrific bit of play and deserved a goal all day long, but.....and it took them an age to decide......they managed to find something wrong with it.  Rule change definitely needed.  

 

You wouldn’t get done for doing 63 on a 60. A margin of error of 10% is added, plus unusually two more at high speed . So probably 67 or 68. Not that I’m encouraging speeding 😇

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

4 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

" ..... a player is either offside or he isnt?"

 

One would hope so, but the Lingaard decision is still being debated, even with the benefit of VAR.

Is the thickness of a sheet of paper enough to deny a perfectly worked and executed goal in the context of the beautiful game?

If its scored against us next season...then yes!

[BroadstairsR 2,137]

Poor old Suarez wouldn't have scored so many under the scrutiny of VAR as applied in that game.

 

His teeth would have put him in an offside  position so many times.

[BroadstairsR 2,137]

3 minutes ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

If its scored against us next season...then yes!

Marginal decisions we can live with, another dose of the Simon Hoopers never ever again, hopefully.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

On balance VAR 'should' be a good thing for a club of our size in the premier league.

Firstly we know that we're likely to be busy in keeping the ball out of our net in many games, so every goal being scrutinused cant hurt.

...secondly, we know that referees favour the bigger clubs in the premier league , so to have their decisions being accountable will be a good thing....moreso if theyre going to show VAR replays in big screens.....however it seems slightly ironic/convenient that the only two clubs in the whole of the league who's stadiums dont have screens are the two who get the most 'home' decisions that go their way in anfield and old trafford, where a replay of officials decisions are needed the most?

 

[hogesar 9,611]

I do hate this rubbish about how men can learn from the women's game, especially in attitude.

First of all, men are different to women. Always the case. Our makeup is different (they wear some, for example) and we generally react differently to different things.

On top of that, when there is as much money and associated pressure in the women's game then I suggest you might see slightly more 'dissent'.

[ged in the onion bag 854]

The poster has a point regardless.   The game is now full of cheats trying to gain an edge, deceiving the ref and grown men behaving like 5 yr olds.  Very sad and action is needed.....and whilst we played in a fair play spirit generally, we do have Steipermann whose embarrassed himself far too often.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

41 minutes ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

On balance VAR 'should' be a good thing for a club of our size in the premier league.

Firstly we know that we're likely to be busy in keeping the ball out of our net in many games, so every goal being scrutinused cant hurt.

...secondly, we know that referees favour the bigger clubs in the premier league , so to have their decisions being accountable will be a good thing....moreso if theyre going to show VAR replays in big screens.....however it seems slightly ironic/convenient that the only two clubs in the whole of the league who's stadiums dont have screens are the two who get the most 'home' decisions that go their way in anfield and old trafford, where a replay of officials decisions are needed the most?

 

Agreed, although I would imagine that Man Utd and Liverpool will have to have screens installed for next season to comply with the use of VAR. They may not have a choice.

[splendidrush 698]

1 hour ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

 

...secondly, we know that referees favour the bigger clubs in the premier league , so to have their decisions being accountable will be a good thing....moreso if theyre going to show VAR replays in big screens.....however it seems slightly ironic/convenient that the only two clubs in the whole of the league who's stadiums dont have screens are the two who get the most 'home' decisions that go their way in anfield and old trafford, where a replay of officials decisions are needed the most?

 

This, VAR will cause a sh!tstorm, by this time next year we'll all realise that it's only as good as those who choose to use it. 👎