The LOLverpool Thread

[Supras]

What do you think players want to know, exactly? Why a decision has been made? They already know - they only ask to undermine the referee and put pressure on him. Have you ever noticed how players go in for a ridiculous late challenge and still say they got the ball? They aren't thick - it's deliberate and pre mediated cheating that the authorities refuse to deal with.

[The Troll]

What do you think players want to know, exactly? Why a decision has been made? They already know - they only ask to undermine the referee and put pressure on him. Have you ever noticed how players go in for a ridiculous late challenge and still say they got the ball? They aren't thick - it's deliberate and pre mediated cheating that the authorities refuse to deal with.

I agreed with you? I cringe when players start shouting at the ref instead of preparing to defend the free kick as no matter how you complain he won't change his mind. But it's to put pressure on the referee about the next decision to try and help your team, I'd say its more gamesmanship than outright cheating

[jagfox]

Happy Birthday to the diving, racist Luiz Suarez.

[Aufc]

What do you think players want to know, exactly? Why a decision has been made? They already know - they only ask to undermine the referee and put pressure on him. Have you ever noticed how players go in for a ridiculous late challenge and still say they got the ball? They aren't thick - it's deliberate and pre mediated cheating that the authorities refuse to deal with.

I agree with you to an extent. In rugby, the players talk to the ref but it is never to argue with them as such. Footballers are arseholes but the problem with the new refs is that they are not willing to talk to players when they make a decision. Even just to explain why they have made a decision. I don't see the harm in having a quick discussion with the ref in certain cases.

[HEED]

I agree with you to an extent. In rugby, the players talk to the ref but it is never to argue with them as such. Footballers are arseholes but the problem with the new refs is that they are not willing to talk to players when they make a decision. Even just to explain why they have made a decision. I don't see the harm in having a quick discussion with the ref in certain cases.

The difference with Rugby is that if the players direct any dissent towards the referee he will give a 10 yard penalty instantly, those 10 yards could be the difference of 3 points or being just out of a kickers reach so the punishment can have quite a big effect on the result of the match.

In Football dissent isn't punished enough and the players know that and will try to use it at every opportunity they can.

[Supras]

I agree with you to an extent. In rugby, the players talk to the ref but it is never to argue with them as such. Footballers are arseholes but the problem with the new refs is that they are not willing to talk to players when they make a decision. Even just to explain why they have made a decision. I don't see the harm in having a quick discussion with the ref in certain cases.

Footballers are not intrinsically worse than all other human beings - they just do it because they can get away with it. In what circumstances would the referee even need to explain a decision? Be specific.

And don't kid yourselves, players never ever accept these "explanations" because that's not why they are asking. They are asking, often not politely to put pressure on the referee and try and influence them. It's not like the NFL, if the ref had a mic to speak to the crowd it'd be "free kick, cause he tripped him (you thick fucks)"

In Football dissent isn't punished enough and the players know that and will try to use it at every opportunity they can.

Exactly.

[printer]

In Football dissent isn't punished enough and the players know that and will try to use it at every opportunity they can.

Indeed. Dissent should be punished with a yellow card according to the Laws, but most of the time isn't. The authorities could quickly nail this by insisting refs punish every show of dissent, including head shaking, finger wagging etc etc. Players woudl soon stop undermining every decision.

And don't kid yourselves, players never ever accept these "explanations" because that's not why they are asking. They are asking, often not politely to put pressure on the referee and try and influence them. It's not like the NFL, if the ref had a mic to speak to the crowd it'd be "free kick, cause he tripped him (you thick fucks)"

Edited January 24, 2013 by printer

[Aufc]

Footballers are not intrinsically worse than all other human beings - they just do it because they can get away with it. In what circumstances would the referee even need to explain a decision? Be specific.

And don't kid yourselves, players never ever accept these "explanations" because that's not why they are asking. They are asking, often not politely to put pressure on the referee and try and influence them. It's not like the NFL, if the ref had a mic to speak to the crowd it'd be "free kick, cause he tripped him (you thick fucks)"

Exactly.

Just if they have made a tackle that they think was fair. Referees can make mistakes. I do agree that dissent should be punished more. I quite like the automatic ten yard rule. That would cut it out pretty quickly.

I just think some referees are in danger of becoming robots and alienating themselves from the players. I like to see a bit of banter between the players and the ref.

Anyways, this thread is about Liverpool so lets not digress.

[Supras]

Indeed. Dissent should be punished with a yellow card according to the Laws, but most of the time isn't. The authorities could quickly nail this by insisting refs punish every show of dissent, including head shaking, finger wagging etc etc. Players woudl soon stop undermining every decision.

And refs can't do it themselves or they will be charged with "ruining the game" or "trying to be the cenrte of attention". The authorities need to lead this, no doubt.

Just if they have made a tackle that they think was fair. Referees can make mistakes. I do agree that dissent should be punished more. I quite like the automatic ten yard rule. That would cut it out pretty quickly.

I just think some referees are in danger of becoming robots and alienating themselves from the players. I like to see a bit of banter between the players and the ref.

Anyways, this thread is about Liverpool so lets not digress.

"Hey ref I think that tackle was fair."

"It wasn't - which is why I gave the free kick."

Seems like a bit of a needless conversation, eh? And of course refs can make mistakes - they do in all sports - but yet they don't have a problem with dissent and we do?

You like to see a bit of banter? I think most fans go for the football and can't hear any banter/would find it tedious as f**k anyway. The referees are there solely to referee the game, and not to explain decisions to players. I would much prefer a robotic referee and players getting on with the game, that's what we are paying to see after all.

[Homer Thompson]

And refs can't do it themselves or they will be charged with "ruining the game" or "trying to be the cenrte of attention". The authorities need to lead this, no doubt.

"Hey ref I think that tackle was fair."

"It wasn't - which is why I gave the free kick."

Seems like a bit of a needless conversation, eh? And of course refs can make mistakes - they do in all sports - but yet they don't have a problem with dissent and we do?

You like to see a bit of banter? I think most fans go for the football and can't hear any banter/would find it tedious as f**k anyway. The referees are there solely to referee the game, and not to explain decisions to players. I would much prefer a robotic referee and players getting on with the game, that's what we are paying to see after all.

Its a needless conversation if thats all you're going to say. The referee, however, could quite easily expand a little more - "You slid in from behind", "your foot was high" "I saw you pull his shirt" etc etc. Your overly simplistic example is nonsense.

As is your claim that players in other sports dont talk to referees. Bowlers quite regularly talk to umpires, especially querying LBW appeals that arent given. Presumably, in your head, the conversation goes

"I thought that was LBW"

"It wasnt - which is why I didnt give him out"

whereas in reality, the conversation is far more along the lines of

"I thought that was LBW"

"I dont, I thought hit his bat too" - or - "I thought it was just missing leg stump"

etc etc

Similarly, in the NFL (the other sport you've mentioned) players and officials are talking all the time. Tennis players also talk to umpires.

Football referees absolutely should communicate more with players.

[Supras]

Its a needless conversation if thats all you're going to say. The referee, however, could quite easily expand a little more - "You slid in from behind", "your foot was high" "I saw you pull his shirt" etc etc. Your overly simplistic example is nonsense.

As is your claim that players in other sports dont talk to referees. Bowlers quite regularly talk to umpires, especially querying LBW appeals that arent given. Presumably, in your head, the conversation goes

"I thought that was LBW"

"It wasnt - which is why I didnt give him out"

whereas in reality, the conversation is far more along the lines of

"I thought that was LBW"

"I dont, I thought hit his bat too" - or - "I thought it was just missing leg stump"

etc etc

Similarly, in the NFL (the other sport you've mentioned) players and officials are talking all the time. Tennis players also talk to umpires.

Football referees absolutely should communicate more with players.

Ah right, and in your fantasy I take it the players are delighted at the chance of an explanation and fully accept it? Yeah fucking right. They know for a fact they have pulled someones shirt or committed so other blatant foul. How often do they genuinely not know what a decision is given? Maybe 1%?

And, be specific, in what sports is it commonplace for players to approach referees and shout at them either during breaks or WHILST PLAY CONTINUES? Are you seriously suggesting that cricket has the same problem with dissent as football?

If you actually know the content of these conversations you'd know how needless they are.

"I got the fucking ball ref!!!"

"No you didn't, you hack at him from behind when the ball was 5 meters away".

"I got the fucking ball ref!!!"

Great explanation. Lets have more of that and less football. It certainly enhances my viewing enjoyment, and is definitely not needless pre meditated cheating.

[Homer Thompson]

Ah right, and in your fantasy I take it the players are delighted at the chance of an explanation and fully accept it? Yeah fucking right. They know for a fact they have pulled someones shirt or committed so other blatant foul. How often do they genuinely not know what a decision is given? Maybe 1%?

And, be specific, in what sports is it commonplace for players to approach referees and shout at them either during breaks or WHILST PLAY CONTINUES? Are you seriously suggesting that cricket has the same problem with dissent as football?

If you actually know the content of these conversations you'd know how needless they are.

"I got the fucking ball ref!!!"

"No you didn't, you hack at him from behind when the ball was 5 meters away".

"I got the fucking ball ref!!!"

Great explanation. Lets have more of that and less football. It certainly enhances my viewing enjoyment, and is definitely not needless pre meditated cheating.

I never mentioned dissent.

I was responding to your ridiculous notion that officials in other sports dont talk to the players, they quite clearly do, and your over simplistic example of why football referees shouldnt do the same.

[Thumper]

I was responding

There's your mistake.

[Supras]

I never mentioned dissent.

I was responding to your ridiculous notion that officials in other sports dont talk to the players, they quite clearly do, and your over simplistic example of why football referees shouldnt do the same.

Do they talk whilst the match is going on? Convenient how many inconvenient points you ignored.

There's your mistake.

Of all the posters on here you are more obsessed with me than anyone else.

Congratulations, I guess.

[Homer Thompson]

Do they talk whilst the match is going on? Convenient how many inconvenient points you ignored.

No, they do it the next day. Of course they talk while the match is going on. Generally, they would talk in breaks in play, just like football referees could.

What other points did I "ignore"? Be specific.

[Supras]

No, they do it the next day. Of course they talk while the match is going on. Generally, they would talk in breaks in play, just like football referees could.

What other points did I "ignore"? Be specific.

Under what circumstances do players need an explanation?

And yeah, you pretty much ignored all of this post:

Ah right, and in your fantasy I take it the players are delighted at the chance of an explanation and fully accept it? Yeah fucking right. They know for a fact they have pulled someones shirt or committed so other blatant foul. How often do they genuinely not know what a decision is given? Maybe 1%?

And, be specific, in what sports is it commonplace for players to approach referees and shout at them either during breaks or WHILST PLAY CONTINUES? Are you seriously suggesting that cricket has the same problem with dissent as football?

If you actually know the content of these conversations you'd know how needless they are.

"I got the fucking ball ref!!!"

"No you didn't, you hack at him from behind when the ball was 5 meters away".

"I got the fucking ball ref!!!"

Great explanation. Lets have more of that and less football. It certainly enhances my viewing enjoyment, and is definitely not needless pre meditated cheating.

[Aufc]

My point was that referees need to be approachable. I hate seeing some of the newer referees not even giving the players the chance to speak to them. It alienates them and they come across as arseholes. A few of the older referees were always good for a bit of banter and that. Changed days nowadays.

[Supras]

My point was that referees need to be approachable. I hate seeing some of the newer referees not even giving the players the chance to speak to them. It alienates them and they come across as arseholes. A few of the older referees were always good for a bit of banter and that. Changed days nowadays.

Fans don't pay to see banter.

Players should STFU and play the game. Referees should enforce the laws of the game.

I cannot see a single time as to when a player would require an explanation.

[Aufc]

Fans don't pay to see banter.

Players should STFU and play the game. Referees should enforce the laws of the game.

I cannot see a single time as to when a player would require an explanation.

Who said they do?

You are seeing it from a referee perspective. I am looking from the player perspective. Everyones job would be easier if referees and players could have a laugh together.

[54_and_counting]

if you feel hard done by you are going to complain to the officials, that happens in every sport

footballers take it to extremes however