Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 £49 million and still can't finish for ****. Hail. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 (edited) £49 million and still can't finish for ****. Hail. They paid 49 million to watch him run fast, not actually score goals. I have realized West Broms genius strategy. Make City have the ball the whole first half so that they tired themselves out passing it around and scoring goals. THEN West Brom pounces in the second half. Edited August 10, 2015 by MisterPinstripe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 They paid 49 million to watch him run fast, not actually score goals. ..... Lol. Just what we're used to. All pace and f-all end product 9 times out of 10. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 I didn't think that was offsides. If I could change one major rule about soccer / foolsball, it would be to eliminate the offsides. If you get behind the defense, good on you. Fastbreaks start occurring at breakneck speed and long-range volleys resemble Gibbs' style Coryell bombs, like Rypien to Clark, a la vintage Lamps to Drogba. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 I didn't think that was offsides. If I could change one major rule about soccer / foolsball, it would be to eliminate the offsides. If you get behind the defense, good on you. Fastbreaks start occurring at breakneck speed and long-range volleys resemble Gibbs' style Coryell bombs, like Rypien to Clark, a la vintage Lamps to Drogba. Would ruin the game. Why not get rid of offsides in the NFL or NHL? Would fundamentally change the game. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 I didn't think that was offsides. If I could change one major rule about soccer / foolsball, it would be to eliminate the offsides. If you get behind the defense, good on you. Fastbreaks start occurring at breakneck speed and long-range volleys resemble Gibbs' style Coryell bombs, like Rypien to Clark, a la vintage Lamps to Drogba. Abramovich hasn't tried to buy that rule change? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 I would bet that a rule change like that would have the opposite effect, less goals scored, as everyone would be keeping guys all of the way back to keep someone from getting behind on goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 I didn't think that was offsides. If I could change one major rule about soccer / foolsball, it would be to eliminate the offsides. If you get behind the defense, good on you. Fastbreaks start occurring at breakneck speed and long-range volleys resemble Gibbs' style Coryell bombs, like Rypien to Clark, a la vintage Lamps to Drogba. It was introduced in (field) hockey a few decades ago and really opened up the game. Granted, the 'pitch' is a little smaller (100x60 yards) than soccer. Would be interesting to experiment with and see how much the tactics change.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 (edited) Would ruin the game. Why not get rid of offsides in the NFL or NHL? Would fundamentally change the game. Ruin what? Tiki Taka? ... Offsides in the NFL is not analogous at all. Offsides in the NFL is at the line of scrimmage, prior to a snap, offsides in soccer relates to players in motion, in the field, trying to score. The equivalent would be a rule that limits WRs from being able to run past DBs, making it illegal to get behind the secondary. Imagine an NFL where it was against the rules to get behind the DBs, would you watch that? The pass game would crash. That is what would be relatable and equivalent to soccer's offsides. ... NHL: Look at the difference in size of the playing "field" / rink. Hockey is already fast paced enough. There's no necessary need to make it more fastbreak centric. That's what it already is. Besides, the offsides in hockey is (again) different than the soccer offsides. In hockey, you can be totally behind the other team's players, you just can't cross into the offensive zone before the puck. Again, different from soccer. Hockey allows you to get behind the defense if your opponent is unable to stop it. The NHL rink is too small, imo, anyway. It should be larger. Could you imagine a hockey rink the size of soccer pitch? - Now, that would fundamentally change the pace of hockey games. So no, those two counter examples are not even in the same ballpark. ... Fundamentally change the game? No it wouldn't, it would simply enhance the game as it is already played, but stop the nonsense of trying to give the defense an extra hand. "Oh, the big meanie was one yard ahead of me while I was picking my nose!" Too ****ing bad. It would increase the number of scoring attempts and scoring opportunities. It would give the game more of a fastbreak element. But more importantly, it would put a stop to sideline referees who are 30 to 50 yards away trying to make a quick judgment call that is maybe the difference of a few feet. Offsides in soccer is fraught with mistakes. Eliminating the offsides adds to the game because strategies for defense and offense would have a whole new gambit, a new arena of development. The only change to the game would be, you'd start seeing those beautiful lead volleys and timing breaks actually lead to wonderful scores rather than being called offsides. It would be an enhancement of the game, an enhancement of what teams already try to do, but ending with actual shots on goal instead of some referee intervention. Edited August 10, 2015 by Monk4thaHALL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 Abramovich hasn't tried to buy that rule change? Even if it was implemented, the Specialist in Failure would find a way to lose it. If not, them gooners would nick it from the League's pockets and sell it for squeaky new kicks. Or maybe those upcycling eco-cools of norf londin could turn it into a half subaru / half food truck, vegan and gluten free of course. (Neko Case has to be playing in the background, at all times, too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 NHL: Look at the difference in size of the playing "field" / rink. Hockey is already fast paced enough. There's no necessary need to make it more fastbreak centric. That's what it already is. Besides, the offsides in hockey is (again) different than the soccer offsides. In hockey, you can be totally behind the other team's players, you just can't cross into the offensive zone before the puck. Again, different from soccer. Hockey allows you to get behind the defense if your opponent is unable to stop it. The NHL rink is too small, imo, anyway. It should be larger. Could you imagine a hockey rink the size of soccer pitch? - Now, that would fundamentally change the pace of hockey games. Two things... they also have line changes in hockey, which is why the offsides rule is the line and not the player. And secondly, olympic and KHL rinks are much bigger and scoring isn't much higher with respect to the competition. It's another mark of skill... the smaller the rink, the tighter your game needs to be to be successful. This is also why a lot of Russians have a hard time in North America. They grow up on the big rinks and the space isn't there and the defense is a lot tighter in the NHL. Nothing really wrong with either game that over 100 years hasn't sorted out... but it's an appropriate complaint to make from a Chelsea fan. If you like to watch scoring I can pm you some links. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 Oh yeah, that reminds me ..... Benteke Bet Watch. Week 1. GHH 1 The poor deluded one 0. 37 more tries to get to that 15 goal mark. . Hail. More than enough time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 More than enough time. I hope I lose. Sincerely. Sadly (or maybe happily for me dependent on your POV); BR is not in Benteke's favour. Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 I hope I lose. Sincerely. Sadly (or maybe happily for me dependent on your POV); BR is not in Benteke's favour. Hail. We'll see. I think Firmino goes 4-4-2 this weekend after his hatty today. Benteke with Firmino running behind? Not a better pair in the league this side of Martin Skrtel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 Two things... they also have line changes in hockey, which is why the offsides rule is the line and not the player. And secondly, olympic and KHL rinks are much bigger and scoring isn't much higher with respect to the competition. It's another mark of skill... the smaller the rink, the tighter your game needs to be to be successful. This is also why a lot of Russians have a hard time in North America. They grow up on the big rinks and the space isn't there and the defense is a lot tighter in the NHL. Nothing really wrong with either game that over 100 years hasn't sorted out... but it's an appropriate complaint to make from a Chelsea fan. If you like to watch scoring I can pm you some links. And they have line changes because of the pace of the game, physical exertion ... on said small rink. Hand in glove. Still, the definition is a line, on a tight, small, playing surface -- not the last man defender. I needed to make that distinction to rebut my opponent's counterpoint. Well aware of the rink size differential. I personally like a larger rink and more spacing for hockey. NHL (sometimes) feels a little roller derby-ish for my taste. Especially when the game is disjointed, not smooth, for long segments of time. Just a scrum for the puck by the boards, then haphazardly cleared to the other end, rinse - repeat. I like technical. Scoring as in birds/women? - I'm good. Still waiting to see the pictures of the new boat / new boobs. Maybe I'll send you some Mike Gartner lead Caps hockey videos. Pretty sure I'm your senior. Oh, there once was a guy named Rod Langway, I'll save him for bed time stories. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Ruin what? Tiki Taka? ... I assume you enjoy watching Chelsea (however that is possible), you like Mourinho ball, want to get rid off offside . . . do you even like soccer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I assume you enjoy watching Chelsea (however that is possible), you like Mourinho ball, want to get rid off offside . . . do you even like soccer? To quote Method Man: [Jose got] mad different methods to the way (he) do (his) ****. You should take a page from Coach K's book (Leading with the Heart), an exponent of the Man-to-Man, who adopted the Zone, out of necessity. "Thaink" about it ... gooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 you like Mourinho ball You see, that really says it all doesn't it. I'm not self-serving. The difference between we Blues and you is that, here, I'm looking to see the game of soccer advance from the stone age, for the benefit of the game itself. Not a self-serving effort singularly focused on my specific club. Though, I assume Arsenal will take whatever hand out they can get when it comes to goals ... amirite? If it needs to start small, like, eliminating the offsides on set pieces, alone ... fine. At least it's a start. There's nothing more infuriating than watching a wonderfully timed run and a perfectly placed ball just so some myopic ref, who is 30 yards away, can call offsides. It's like, if the in-bounds pass in basketball, underneath the basket, was officiated with a rule that said: if someone on the offensive side gets free from a back-pick and has an open lane to the basket, with a perfect in-bounds pass, they called it "unfair" and eliminated it from the game. The point is that offensive teams are trying to get their men behind the defense, that's the whole point. They set up all this movement to get someone free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 do you even like soccer? I was going to leave this earlier one alone, but you've decided to make it personal. So here. Filthy, racist rent boy. I do enjoy the irony of you two embracing a homophobic slur while calling me racist. Bigot. ... Or is it customary for folk in Raleigh to walk around with their head up their asses? Maybe it's just ARSEnal folk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 You see, that really says it all doesn't it. I'm not self-serving. The difference between we Blues and you is that, here, I'm looking to see the game of soccer advance from the stone age, for the benefit of the game itself. Not a self-serving effort singularly focused on my specific club. Though, I assume Arsenal will take whatever hand out they can get when it comes to goals ... amirite? If it needs to start small, like, eliminating the offsides on set pieces, alone ... fine. At least it's a start. There's nothing more infuriating than watching a wonderfully timed run and a perfectly placed ball just so some myopic ref, who is 30 yards away, can call offsides. It's like, if the in-bounds pass in basketball, underneath the basket, was officiated with a rule that said: if someone on the offensive side gets free from a back-pick and has an open lane to the basket, with a perfect in-bounds pass, they called it "unfair" and eliminated it from the game. The point is that offensive teams are trying to get their men behind the defense, that's the whole point. They set up all this movement to get someone free. You really dont think this would have an impact on the game? What do you think will happen if offsides was eliminated? You say it would open up the game for all of these great balls over the top for guys to run on to. It would have the opposite effect. Do you think managers would leave all of that space open behind the back four if there was no offsides? No, they would drop the back four back so there was no place to drop a ball into. Just look at the West Brom and Man City game this afternoon, there was no space for fun soccer, runs, through balls, etc because the defense had dropped back. It wouldnt be quite as bad as that but it would be close. We would no longer have those great through balls or great diagonal runs that cuts through the defense to get a player one on one with the keeper. Or at least it wouldnt be nearly as often. Removing offsides would cause us to have fewer of those types of goals rather than more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) How is a corner kick, for example, going to look significantly different, FROM the defensive team's point of view in their defensive deployment, if the offsides was eliminated? Are you telling me that corner kicks would cease to resemble what they do today? That offensive teams wouldn't be trying to have guys set picks, run interference, with a handful of guys charging the net? Or that defensive teams wouldn't try to defend that SAME EXACT movement in the same manner they already do? Are you suggesting that the game will be unplayable if offsides was eliminated? I think corner kicks would look exactly the same from both the offensive and defensive point of view, only difference, the guy who slips behind the defender has a much higher conversion rate to score because the offsides (a matter of a foot or two) was removed from the rule book. Edited August 11, 2015 by Monk4thaHALL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jobaga Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 A corner kick would not change because everyone is onside when the ball is kicked. I don't think eliminating offsides would have the outcome you are looking for. You repeatedly mention well timed runs and beautiful through balls. You wouldn't have to time your runs. There wouldn't be high lines. The game would stretch and the play would get super direct. I am not a big fan of kick and run or hoof and head. I like build up, skill, intricate passing, movement off the ball and well timed runs. The style you are proposing would not be appealing to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) How is a corner kick, for example, going to look significantly different, FROM the defensive team's point of view in their defensive deployment, if the offsides was eliminated? Are you telling me that corner kicks would cease to resemble what they do today? That offensive teams wouldn't be trying to have guys set picks, run interference, with a handful of guys charging the net? Or that defensive teams wouldn't try to defend that SAME EXACT movement in the same manner they already do? Are you suggesting that the game will be unplayable if offsides was eliminated? I think corner kicks would look exactly the same from both the offensive and defensive point of view, only difference, the guy who slips behind the defender has a much higher conversion rate to score because the offsides (a matter of a foot or two) was removed from the rule book. Im not talking about corner kicks. Everyone is onside when the corner is taken. YOU were talking about eliminating offsides all together. Or you now saying keep the offsides for only corners? Do you realize how rarely a corner ends in an offsides call? Doesnt happen very often, its usually a foul called on the offensive team. A corner kick would not change because everyone is onside when the ball is kicked. I don't think eliminating offsides would have the outcome you are looking for. You repeatedly mention well timed runs and beautiful through balls. You wouldn't have to time your runs. There wouldn't be high lines. The game would stretch and the play would get super direct. I am not a big fan of kick and run or hoof and head. I like build up, skill, intricate passing, movement off the ball and well timed runs. The style you are proposing would not be appealing to me... I think he wants Australian rules football. Edited August 11, 2015 by MisterPinstripe 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 rent boys don't have to be gay. Gay for pay maybe, but certainly not a requirement. Big talk for a club that has outspent Arsenal by an order of magnitude over the last 15 years. But ya gotta use that money you've been charging for ZJs somehow, right? Why are we even talking about rules changes when you don't even know the rules you want to change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jobaga Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 …. Don't let GHH find out we agree on something…Blue and Red….what's next cats and dogs??? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now