What are the things you hate regarding fitba?

[NotThePars]

44 minutes ago, Stormzy said:

Agree with most of that. Sterling used to have a lack of an end product (as youd expect with a youngster) so as an England fan I always found him frustrating but over the last 2 or 3 years he has undoubtedly been our best player. I feel like since everyone accepted he wasn't a scumbag and realised the media were being racist arseholes he's not talked about enough. 

The lack of an end product was why people slaughtered him at the World Cup but every time they took him off I thought you could see England become noticeably less of a threat as they were less dynamic going forward and didn't have any players that could stretch the defence like he did. 

Think his brace against Spain was the point where people couldn't ignore how good he is. 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

I'm pretty open to arguments for and against summer football, but the one argument I can't stand is that moronic "wHaT iF sCoTlANd QuAlIFy FoR a MaJoR tOuRnAMent?!?!”
For 23 years, that problem wouldn't have arisen and even if it did, why would it matter?  Chances are (even if Scotland qualified) the hit to the leagues would be pretty small as I imagine the majority of the Scotland team would be England-based.  If Scotland didn't qualify, the hit would be even weaker (only three SPL players were in Euro 2008).  There'd be nothing to stop the leagues stopping for a month.  This next World Cup will be during the regular season anyway so there might have to be some halt regardless.
Anyway, from 1998 onwards, Iceland, Ireland, USA, Norway, Sweden and maybe a few others have competed at major tournaments and managed to have summer seasons without any trouble.

I don’t like the idea of summer football but

Brazil seem to have managed ok over the years

Mind you they’re on the equator so some of them are playing winter football

[thisal]

1 hour ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

I don’t like the idea of summer football but

Brazil seem to have managed ok over the years

Mind you they’re on the equator so some of them are playing winter football

My  objection to summer football has nothing to do to improving quality or watching in warmer weather. It's entirely to do with having other things to do in the good weather and boredom in the winter.

[Highland Capital]

4 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

I don’t like the idea of summer football but

Brazil seem to have managed ok over the years

Mind you they’re on the equator so some of them are playing winter football

 

2 hours ago, thisal said:

My  objection to summer football has nothing to do to improving quality or watching in warmer weather. It's entirely to do with having other things to do in the good weather and boredom in the winter.

I probably verge in favour of summer football but I would miss the games over Christmas.  The argument about international tournaments though is a nonsense argued by utter morons.

Edited February 20, 2021 by Highland Capital

[Highland Capital]

When a club appoints a manager, the fans go "meh" and other fans scream "Give him a chance!!1!!". Of course, the new manager will get a chance, but doesn't make the fans lack of excitement about an appointment any less valid. 

Edited February 24, 2021 by Highland Capital

[Ann Dan Otherthing]

I detest Sportscene’s 4 replays for any incident where the ball goes towards the goals, even if it’s a shot that could make with my left foot and my (dead) granny could save with her eyes closed. It’s filler obviously, but painfully highlights some of the shite football in the Premier league. Better to cut down on the highlights and fill with articles about whatever, or even ‘on this day’ segments.

[Highland Capital]

When a club appoints a manager, the fans go "ooo not sure about this appointment" and then they watch his first interview filled with the usual "great fans, great town, great players" pish and they change their mind before a ball is kicked.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

I don’t like the idea of summer football but

Brazil seem to have managed ok over the years

Mind you they’re on the equator so some of them are playing winter football

Update

There’s apparently a stadium in Brazil where the halfway line is on the equator so they’re defending the winter goal for one half and the summer goal for the other

https://www.zmescience.com/other/feature-post/football-equator/

[Guest TheJTS98]

Probably mentioned on this thread before, but the away goals rule is old-fashioned pish that does nothing but ruin perfectly good European ties by giving too much weight to certain moments for no good reason and it often denies us a good penalty shoot-out.

It was worthwhile in the days when home advantage was a huge deal, but in the 21st century it is just a drag on European ties. Time to bin it.

Especially absurd that it's being used to settle ties played behind closed doors and where often it's not actually at either team's home ground anyway. A good chance to just get rid of it. It's served its purpose, but is no longer needed.

It should have been fired in the bin after the ludicrous spectacle of the 2003 Champions League semi-final between AC Milan and Inter, two teams who share a stadium which they both call home. One of them got into the final because they drew 0-0 and 1-1 and they drew the 'right' one 1-1. Daft.

Edited March 10, 2021 by TheJTS98

[Guest TheJTS98]

Speculation about whether a new manager at any club is 'the right man for Club X'.

Pointless shite which is little more than easy and cheap content for podcasts and newspapers.

Nobody knows. Any coach going to any club might work out or might be a complete disaster. Or maybe it'll just be shrug-of-the-shoulders ok. There are so many factors that nobody can see.

We've had so many examples of surprisingly good or bad appointments that we know it's completely pointless. Yet for some reason people can't help themselves.

Why not just wait and see?

Edited March 24, 2021 by TheJTS98

[DiegoDiego]

Aye, no point in taking about how well Scotland will do at the Euros either, let's just wait and see.

[HalfCutNinja]

On 10/03/2021 at 02:10, TheJTS98 said:

Probably mentioned on this thread before, but the away goals rule is old-fashioned pish that does nothing but ruin perfectly good European ties by giving too much weight to certain moments for no good reason and it often denies us a good penalty shoot-out.

It was worthwhile in the days when home advantage was a huge deal, but in the 21st century it is just a drag on European ties. Time to bin it.

Especially absurd that it's being used to settle ties played behind closed doors and where often it's not actually at either team's home ground anyway. A good chance to just get rid of it. It's served its purpose, but is no longer needed.

It should have been fired in the bin after the ludicrous spectacle of the 2003 Champions League semi-final between AC Milan and Inter, two teams who share a stadium which they both call home. One of them got into the final because they drew 0-0 and 1-1 and they drew the 'right' one 1-1. Daft.

Couldn't disagree more. I assume you never watched European games before it was introduced.

So often the away team played in a way that would make Mourinho blush, just trying to shitfest a 0-0. It ruined ties and make them torture to watch. The away goals rule was a revelation and brings a fantastic dynamic to European ties now. 

Its very much in a team's interest to try to score away from home, and has made games infinitely better to watch as a result. 

This season, for the first time ever since records began in 1888, there have been more away wins than home in England's top flight. Which shows home advantage, when the fans are there, is still a very big deal and always will be. So you're wrong there too.

[Guest TheJTS98]

16 minutes ago, HalfCutNinja said:

Couldn't disagree more. I assume you never watched European games before it was introduced.

So often the away team played in a way that would make Mourinho blush, just trying to shitfest a 0-0. It ruined ties and make them torture to watch. The away goals rule was a revelation and brings a fantastic dynamic to European ties now. 

Its very much in a team's interest to try to score away from home, and has made games infinitely better to watch as a result. 

This season, for the first time ever since records began in 1888, there have been more away wins than home in England's top flight. Which shows home advantage, when the fans are there, is still a very big deal and always will be. So you're wrong there too.

UEFA first brought in the away goals rule in 1965. If you're willing to argue that the nature of home advantage hasn't changed since then, then good luck to you.

Just play two games of football and be done with it.

For all that some teams in the 60s may have tried to park the bus, we've also seen plenty examples in modern times of home teams just keeping things tight because the penalty for conceding can be so disproportionately high. Just play the games.

A lot of coaches seem to agree with me. In 2019 there seemed a possibility of it being abolished. Seems to have gone quiet since then. 'The coaches think that scoring away goals is not as difficult as it was in the past'. - UEFA's deputy secretary general.

Hopefully it's on borrowed time.

Of course home advantage exists. But both teams get a home game. Sky had a good graphic on their website a while ago showing that the impact of home advantage has been in steady decline more or less since league football started. I don't see how home advantage existing means we need the away goals rule. Both teams get home advantage. Slanting the balance of a tie needlessly because someone scores a header from a corner in one stadium or other seems needless.

Edited March 24, 2021 by TheJTS98

[HalfCutNinja]

12 minutes ago, TheJTS98 said:

UEFA first brought in the away goals rule in 1965. If you're willing to argue that the nature of home advantage hasn't changed since then, then good luck to you.

Just play two games of football and be done with it.

For all that some teams in the 60s may have tried to park the bus, we've also seen plenty examples in modern times of home teams just keeping things tight because the penalty for conceding can be so disproportionately high. Just play the games.

Not for all games it didn't. That was in the early 90's if memory serves.

The only stipulation I'd make is I think for two-legged ties there should be no extra time.

Its not fair for one team to get half an hour extra to score an away goal, and its also not fair for one team to get two hours at home and the other to get one and a half hours. Though, again, its made for some incredibly dramatic moments and brought a very exciting dynamic to the game.

[ArabGaz]

I don’t mind the away goals rule but it shouldn’t apply in extra time. Seems a bit unfair that one team gets an additional 30 mins to score one.

Something that annoys me way more than it should are away teams unnecessarily wearing their change kit. 

edit - beaten to it!

Edited March 24, 2021 by ArabGaz

[Guest TheJTS98]

1 minute ago, HalfCutNinja said:

Not for all games it didn't. That was in the early 90's if memory serves.

The only stipulation I'd make is I think for two-legged ties there should be no extra time.

Its not fair for one team to get half an hour extra to score an away goal, and its also not fair for one team to get two hours at home and the other to get one and a half hours. Though, again, its made for some incredibly dramatic moments and brought a very exciting dynamic to the game.

I'm afraid you're very much mistaken. 1965 CWC, 1966, Fairs/UEFA Cup. 1967 European Cup first round. 1970 - all rounds.

I'd abolish extra-time altogether in football. It's usually garbage and by that point both teams have had 90 minutes to win it. Just go to penalties right away, one leg or two.

I think away goals has killed as many ties as it's kept alive. A team that won 1-0 at home and goes 1-0 up away from home can often put their feet up and relax. Why? Their opponents should only need to score twice rather than three times. Loads of examples like this.

Just play two games. Why complicate it further?

[HalfCutNinja]

1 minute ago, TheJTS98 said:

I'm afraid you're very much mistaken. 1965 CWC, 1966, Fairs/UEFA Cup. 1967 European Cup first round. 1970 - all rounds.

I'd abolish extra-time altogether in football. It's usually garbage and by that point both teams have had 90 minutes to win it. Just go to penalties right away, one leg or two.

I think away goals has killed as many ties as it's kept alive. A team that won 1-0 at home and goes 1-0 up away from home can often put their feet up and relax. Why? Their opponents should only need to score twice rather than three times. Loads of examples like this.

Just play two games. Why complicate it further?

I'll take your word for it but definitely remember differently. 

Because its necessary to make games better to watch. Why wouldn't the away team just play two back fives and make sure they don't concede a goal?  Barcelona just lost at home in Europe for the first time in 35 games. Do you think they've lost away from home in that time? Of course they have, many times.

So why wouldn't they just play ten behind the ball away from home, knowing they'll win at home? It makes games much better spectacles. Its not particularly complicated.

[Guest TheJTS98]

14 minutes ago, HalfCutNinja said:

1) I'll take your word for it but definitely remember differently. 

2) Because its necessary to make games better to watch. Why wouldn't the away team just play two back fives and make sure they don't concede a goal?  Barcelona just lost at home in Europe for the first time in 35 games. Do you think they've lost away from home in that time? Of course they have, many times.

So why wouldn't they just play ten behind the ball away from home, knowing they'll win at home? It makes games much better spectacles. Its not particularly complicated.

1) You can choose to remember it differently if you like. Or you could just refer to any of the large number of ties settled by away goals since 1970 (or 65 in a limited form). It's not something UEFA kept a secret.

2) Why is it necessary? What's wrong with two games of football? I'd argue that the away goals perhaps strengthens home records because a team trailing 2-1 away from home is less likely to be inclined to chase an equaliser and will just take the defeat back to the second leg because the perceived value of 'the away goal' makes that defeat look quite good. That's robbing the public of a contest. And how many ties over the years have been effectively killed off by an early away goal in the second leg, again, robbing the public of a competitive second leg?

There will always be teams who defend. That's part of football. The away goals rule just makes it more likely that you'll render a quarter of a tie pointless just because there's a silly rule about where a goal was scored.

It was introduced in an era when travel was much more of a big deal than it is now, and where teams usually knew nothing about their opponents and often where they were going. It's got no place in 2021.

Edited March 24, 2021 by TheJTS98

[velo army]

Any commentator saying "away goals count double". PTTGOYN thread for this pish, probably.

[HalfCutNinja]

5 minutes ago, TheJTS98 said:

1) You can choose to remember it differently if you like. Or you could just refer to any of the large number of ties settled by away goals since 1970 (or 65 in a limited form). It's not something UEFA kept a secret.

2) Why is it necessary? What's wrong with two games of football? I'd argue that the away goals perhaps strengthens home records because a team trailing 2-1 away from home is less likely to be inclined to chase an equaliser and will just take the defeat back to the second leg. That's robbing the public of a contest. And how many ties over the years have been effectively killed off by an early away goal in the second leg, again, robbing the public of a competitive second leg?

There will always be teams who defend. That's part of football. The away goals rule just makes it more likely that you'll render a quarter of a tie pointless just because there's a silly rule about where a goal was scored.

It was introduced in an era when travel was much more of a big deal than it is now, and where teams usually knew nothing about their opponents and often where they were going. It's got no place in 2021.

As opposed to half a tie being rendered pointless, or even more given the incentive is for both teams to do that.

I can't be bothered arguing all day about this. Away goals is a brilliant rule and makes games and ties way more entertaining than they otherwise would be, leaving ties on a knife edge. Its here to stay, cause it should be.

Home advantage is a massive deal and always will be, and away goals is a fantatic facet of two-legged ties. If you disagree that's fine I will get over it.