JAL Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 I don't like the rule that says that injured players who've had the physio on and are back on their feet have to leave the pitch, let the game start again and then have to get the refs permission to come back on. Why do they do this? It doesn't save time? If the player is back on his feet, let them get on with it. Its a health and safety issue, the referee has to ensure the safety of all the players, if ones injured he must allow the injured player to be treated or assessed by a professional who then along with the player decides on if that player is fit enough to resume playing without any further consequences to his health.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
JAL Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 (edited) I think they've messed up the offside law beyond comprehension. I don't see the problem with calling any player in an offside position up for a free kick, regardless of whether or not they were "intefering with play". The only footballers not intefering with play are the substitutes. Some of the offside decisions have been mistakes made mainly by the assistant referees at some premiership games but then the so called pundits have added far, far, more confusion to the offside rule with long winded debates aimed to fill their airwaves or tv minutes to what have been basic errors of judgement by individual officials. Soccer pundits and radio football pundits must share the blame in all this confusion to the understanding of the offside Law 11. IF THESE PUNDITS DONT UNDERSTAND THE OFFSIDE LAW WHY ARE THEY GIVING THEIR SO CALLED EXPERT OPINION ON THE GAME. Edited February 13, 2008 by JAL
Recommended Posts