[Humour] Sian Massey

dsr-burnley · Mar 25, 2019

Lower West Stander said:
Don’t buy any of this - she flagged too late.

And the offside wasn’t even close...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

FWIW, she was wrong by about four hundredths of a second. Perhaps five or six hundredths, at a pinch. That's fairly close.

One of the things they ought to sort out with VAR, but they won't because they don't think about it, is when they count the ball as being played. Is it at the moment the player's boot makes contact, or the moment the ball leaves the boot and contact ceases? It's important because they are talking about offside being offside even if it's only an inch; and in the time the ball is in contact with the boot (which is about a hundredth of a second), a running player moves about 3 inches. And his back foot moves about 6 inches. Can the cameras be accurate enough to get that exactly right?

Easy 10 · Mar 25, 2019

dsr-burnley said:
FWIW, she was wrong by about four hundredths of a second. Perhaps five or six hundredths, at a pinch. That's fairly close.

One of the things they ought to sort out with VAR, but they won't because they don't think about it, is when they count the ball as being played. Is it at the moment the player's boot makes contact, or the moment the ball leaves the boot and contact ceases? It's important because they are talking about offside being offside even if it's only an inch; and in the time the ball is in contact with the boot (which is about a hundredth of a second), a running player moves about 3 inches. And his back foot moves about 6 inches. Can the cameras be accurate enough to get that exactly right?

Christ, would we even WANT them to be ? Its football, not a bloody science project. The whole point of offside is to prevent goal-hanging, but its morphed even further now into this absurd discussion over millimetres and body parts being offside.

I liked the notion of the "level is onside, benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker" rule, but in practice the defending team almost always gets the benefit of the doubt on offside calls. Personally, I'd like to see the offside law loosened up a bit more in favour of the attacking team, in that there needs to be DAYLIGHT between the forward and the defender in order to be offside. So yes, the forward can be slightly ahead of the defender when the ball is played - if there isn't an actual gap you can see through between the players, then play on.

Worth a try.

Westdene Wonder · Mar 25, 2019

Hillian1 said:
I would expect to be sacked if I was as poor at doing my job as she is at hers.

I consider that all officials should have played the game at least at the level they are making decisions for,so that they have an insight of what goes on during a game,this lass cannot be expected to be aware
of the nasty side of the game,she is there to satisfy the PC brigade

dazzer6666 · Mar 25, 2019

Easy 10 said:
Christ, would we even WANT them to be ? Its football, not a bloody science project. The whole point of offside is to prevent goal-hanging, but its morphed even further now into this absurd discussion over millimetres and body parts being offside.

I liked the notion of the "level is onside, benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker" rule, but in practice the defending team almost always gets the benefit of the doubt on offside calls. Personally, I'd like to see the offside law loosened up a bit more in favour of the attacking team, in that there needs to be DAYLIGHT between the forward and the defender in order to be offside. So yes, the forward can be slightly ahead of the defender when the ball is played - if there isn't an actual gap you can see through between the players, then play on.

Worth a try.

Absolutely agree......

drew · Mar 25, 2019

Westdene Wonder said:
I consider that all officials should have played the game at least at the level they are making decisions for,so that they have an insight of what goes on during a game,this lass cannot be expected to be aware
of the nasty side of the game,she is there to satisfy the PC brigade

Dream on.

How many ex professional footballers will go on to be referees. There is a limited supply of people willing to do the job, the vast majority of which haven't played to any high level of football. Unfortunately, the quality of those doing the job is getting lower and lower.

Easy 10 · Mar 25, 2019

dazzer6666 said:
Absolutely agree......

Its not THAT mad an idea, is it ? Daylight = offside, level / slightly ahead = play on.

I'm heartily sick of offside calls being made because somebodies left bollock has flapped in front of the last defender.

Medwayseagull · Mar 26, 2019

Easy 10 said:
Its not THAT mad an idea, is it ? Daylight = offside, level / slightly ahead = play on.

I'm heartily sick of offside calls being made because somebodies left bollock has flapped in front of the last defender.

Shouldn't that comment be on the Peter Beardsley thread ?

Cheshire Cat · Mar 26, 2019

An old ex-pro player as a referee would be knackered, and couldn't keep up. Think Mick Channon in his dotage dragging himself back from the penalty area to try (and fail) to stay onside.

Jimmehh · Mar 26, 2019

Westdene Wonder said:
I consider that all officials should have played the game at least at the level they are making decisions for,so that they have an insight of what goes on during a game,this lass cannot be expected to be aware
of the nasty side of the game,she is there to satisfy the PC brigade

The issue with this is the ex players who want to be refs, struggle- a lot of the time based on who they played for.

You can’t ref a game as an ex player, or if you support that team, or if you come from that area (I believe)... that means a lot of players - especially journeymen - wouldn’t be able to become professional refs.

One Teddy Maybank · Mar 26, 2019

Jimmehh said:
The issue with this is the ex players who want to be refs, struggle- a lot of the time based on who they played for.

You can’t ref a game as an ex player, or if you support that team, or if you come from that area (I believe)... that means a lot of players - especially journeymen - wouldn’t be able to become professional refs.

Depends on the level they’ve played at.
I think Ryman/National League would be adequate myself, the difference in each level is generally pace, and in terms of that the more games you do, the more become accustomed to it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jimmehh · Mar 26, 2019

One Teddy Maybank said:
Depends on the level they’ve played at.
I think Ryman/National League would be adequate myself, the difference in each level is generally pace, and in terms of that the more games you do, the more become accustomed to it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely - but the quote I replied to said that they should’ve played at the level they’re reffing at, which I’ve explained just isn’t possible for the majority unfortunately.

Imagine if you’re from London - support Arsenal... unlikely they’d be able to ref many if any of the London teams as they’re rivals, but especially Chelsea & Spurs... thats before you get on to the fact that they played for Manchester, Leicester, and Southampton... could be hardly any games they’re actually able to ref.

Just a note - the above is an example obviously

One Teddy Maybank · Mar 26, 2019

Jimmehh said:
Absolutely - but the quote I replied to said that they should’ve played at the level they’re reffing at, which I’ve explained just isn’t possible for the majority unfortunately.

Imagine if you’re from London - support Arsenal... unlikely they’d be able to ref many if any of the London teams as they’re rivals, but especially Chelsea & Spurs... thats before you get on to the fact that they played for Manchester, Leicester, and Southampton... could be hardly any games they’re actually able to ref.

Just a note - the above is an example obviously

That’s fair enough, and I wouldn’t disagree re the potential of bias, but the level is immaterial in that the difference is pace, so top level non-league would suffice.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gwylan · Mar 26, 2019

Westdene Wonder said:
I consider that all officials should have played the game at least at the level they are making decisions for,so that they have an insight of what goes on during a game,this lass cannot be expected to be aware
of the nasty side of the game,she is there to satisfy the PC brigade

Interestingly, two of the best female rugby referees (Alhambra Nievas and Joy Neville) are not only ex-players but ex-internationals. They're right at the top of their game, both former World Referees of the Year and both have reffed major men's and women's games. None of the top male refs have played at the highest level.

I wonder if this is to do with money. They certainly wouldn't have earned much as players, so going into reffing would not a huge financial hit but I can't see many top rugby players wanting to do it. And that would apply even more to footballers.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Humour] Sian Massey

More options

dsr-burnley

Well-known member

Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP

Westdene Wonder

New member

dazzer6666

Well-known member

drew

Drew

Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP

Medwayseagull

JCB

Cheshire Cat

The most curious thing..

Jimmehh

Well-known member

One Teddy Maybank

Well-known member

Jimmehh

Well-known member

One Teddy Maybank

Well-known member

Gwylan

Well-known member

Share this page

Forum statistics

Online statistics

Newest members

Share this page