The farce that is FIFA/uefa

[tomasj]

UEFA and FIFA, like the IOC, are thoroughly corrupt gentlemen's clubs. They are the Rotary Club of sports. Blatter should've been removed ages ago, nevermind never become president in the first place. International sporting organisations make politics seem downright clean and honest.

The UEFA and FIFA offices need a good airing out. Starting with the public drowning of Sepp Blatter in Lake Geneva.

 

[Flaggers]

UEFA and FIFA, like the IOC, are thoroughly corrupt gentlemen's clubs. They are the Rotary Club of sports. Blatter should've been removed ages ago, nevermind never become president in the first place. International sporting organisations make politics seem downright clean and honest. The UEFA and FIFA offices need a good airing out. Starting with the public drowning of Sepp Blatter off Trent Bridge.

Much more satisfying...

 

[tomasj]

I can live with that. If we sell tickets, we might make a few bob as well.

 

[Francis Benali (on loan)]

Jerome Champagne announces intention to run for FIFA presidency in 2015. Better watch his back.

 

[DanR]

Jerome Champagne announces intention to run for FIFA presidency in 2015. Better watch his back.

He gets my vote for his name alone. Not that I have a vote on who runs the game, being a humble football supporter.

 

[winnits]

Danny Prosecco is a more effective candidate, but I hope they overlook the overtures of Vince Asti.

 

[Benando]

Some of his plans seem alright what he's spoken about - orange sin bin cards to abolish trivial second yellows like a player taking his shirt off celebrating a goal.

Anyone but Blatter will do.

 

[Francis Benali (on loan)]

Any serious challenger will be out of the organisation before the vote comes around.

 

[JordanForest]

Some of his plans seem alright what he's spoken about - orange sin bin cards to abolish trivial second yellows like a player taking his shirt off celebrating a goal.

Anyone but Blatter will do.

Taking you shirt off during a celebration is stupid, a deserved yellow. You know it's a yellow, and there's absolutely no need to do it. When did running around topless represent joy? Also, the whole of football is based on money. The photo's that will be shown in papers/the main highlights are those of the goal and celebration. As a sponsor, you don't want the player removing your logo when it's about to get most publicity.

 

[Strummer]

When did running around topless represent joy?

Oh I don't know; watching a group of ladies running around topless would be something I would find immensely joyful.

 

[Benando]

Taking you shirt off during a celebration is stupid, a deserved yellow. You know it's a yellow, and there's absolutely no need to do it. When did running around topless represent joy? Also, the whole of football is based on money. The photo's that will be shown in papers/the main highlights are those of the goal and celebration. As a sponsor, you don't want the player removing your logo when it's about to get most publicity.

Who cares about whether the sponsor gets exposure? When Henderson goes mad after every goal he scores, I don't think but what about Fawaz's fridges not being prominent in the photo.

I'm not saying it's right to take your shirt off celebrating but does it really warrant a second yellow card for a player? It's trivial and something a sin bin would be useful for.

 

[JordanForest]

Who cares about whether the sponsor gets exposure? When Henderson goes mad after every goal he scores, I don't think but what about Fawaz's fridges not being prominent in the photo.

I'm not saying it's right to take your shirt off celebrating but does it really warrant a second yellow card for a player? It's trivial and something a sin bin would be useful for.

Yes - you know the rules and there's no reason not to follow them.

I think the sponsor! Ofcourse you don't conciously. How many people look at an ad and then instantly buy their product? No-one. That's not what advertising is all about.

 

[Benando]

Yes - you know the rules and there's no reason not to follow them.

I think the sponsor! Ofcourse you don't conciously. How many people look at an ad and then instantly buy their product? No-one. That's not what advertising is all about.

So who cares about a sponsor? If they know anything about football, they know a celebration like this is always a risk especially in the last minute of games. I doubt it even crosses a sponsors mind when they sign a deal with a club that they run the risk of not being in papers if the team scores a last minute goal.

Funny thing is, this guy running for FIFA president thinks this rule is stupid and would be better treated by the orange card/sin bin. I can't help but agree considering the number of things a yellow card warrants in football.

 

[JordanForest]

So who cares about a sponsor? If they know anything about football, they know a celebration like this is always a risk especially in the last minute of games. I doubt it even crosses a sponsors mind when they sign a deal with a club that they run the risk of not being in papers if the team scores a last minute goal.

Funny thing is, this guy running for FIFA president thinks this rule is stupid and would be better treated by the orange card/sin bin. I can't help but agree considering the number of things a yellow card warrants in football.

Football cares about sponsors. Football as it is now is completely reliant on sponsors, due to the money they give. This is why the punishment is their, to reduce the chance of a player taking their shirt off. I'm sure it absolutely crosses their mind. They get the most publicity when a player scores.

So he doesn't think the rule is stupid, he thinks the punishment is?

 

[Benando]

Football cares about sponsors. Football as it is now is completely reliant on sponsors, due to the money they give. This is why the punishment is their, to reduce the chance of a player taking their shirt off. I'm sure it absolutely crosses their mind. They get the most publicity when a player scores.

So he doesn't think the rule is stupid, he thinks the punishment is?

I'm sure the rule was brought in to appease foreign viewers of football who consider it offensive, not to please the sponsors. The fact football is more commercial than ever relaxes this rule further. We have more stadium sponsorship, MU even have sponsors of their training gear

The punishment is outdated and considering all the connotations linked to yellow cards, this is trivial and the orange card is a suitable punishment for this.

 

[JordanForest]

I'm sure the rule was brought in to appease foreign viewers of football who consider it offensive, not to please the sponsors. The fact football is more commercial than ever relaxes this rule further. We have more stadium sponsorship, MU even have sponsors of their training gear

The punishment is outdated and considering all the connotations linked to yellow cards, this is trivial and the orange card is a suitable punishment for this.

Well there's another reason then. Not sure how that relaxes the rule?

It's just a stupid thing to do. The punishment could be a red card for all I care, there's no need for it at all

 

[888balluk]

Not really FIFA or uefa but the FA. How can away goals not count UNTIL extra time is played. Man utd would have been through last night if it was a European night.

How can it be fair that Sunderland get an extra 30 minutes to score an away goal?

 

[Gingers Across the Midfield]

"@SkySportsNews: UEFA change the rules for Euro 2016 - hosts France will play qualifiers but there'll be no points at stake in their games! Details #SSN"

?????

 

[Francis Benali (on loan)]

"@SkySportsNews: UEFA change the rules for Euro 2016 - hosts France will play qualifiers but there'll be no points at stake in their games! Details #SSN"

?????

24 teams qualify for 2016.

Terrible number for knockout - four of six best third places through. Draw a whipping boy in your group and the first round (over two thirds of the tournament in terms of matches) is a foregone conclusion.

Too many for qualifiers. It will probably mean three teams from same group qualifying in some cases. It will be harder for the likes of Spain, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, etc to miss out. Clubs will feel even more justified in preventing their players from playing in those games when the ease of qualifying has rendered them largely meaningless.

The 2020 competition with no host nation may just kill off the Euros completely.

 

[Flaggers]

Not really FIFA or uefa but the FA. How can away goals not count UNTIL extra time is played. Man utd would have been through last night if it was a European night. How can it be fair that Sunderland get an extra 30 minutes to score an away goal?

Or, how can it be fair than a team gets an extra 30 minutes to score a goal at home?

 

[Francis Benali (on loan)]

I quite like this rule. The extra thirty mins of home advantage for one team is cancelled out by the away goals win opportunity for the other. It encourages the away team to go for the kill in ET and leaves gaps for the home side. The game gets stretched, which you want in ET. I think it may also result in less penalty shoot outs. In the FA Cup or at international competitions (where obviously you can't play away goals) ET played between two tired teams afraid to lose is often a dull stalemate. I don't know what that stats are for LC v FA Cup ETs though.

We'd have lost to Bristol City in 1989 had away goals counted after ninety minutes and there would have been no Forest 3 Luton 1 at Wembley (which is my favourite ever game including my favourite ever goal). So if for no other reason, I say it is a good rule.

 

[adam09]

Yeah extra time in internationals is nearly always a load of bollocks.

I think a possibly good idea would be to do what certain modes of rugby and cricket have done and award bonus points for a certain amount of goals scored in a game. Say 3 goals gets you an extra point and 5+ goals gets you 2 extra points.

 

[888balluk]

I quite like this rule. The extra thirty mins of home advantage for one team is cancelled out by the away goals win opportunity for the other. It encourages the away team to go for the kill in ET and leaves gaps for the home side. The game gets stretched, which you want in ET. I think it may also result in less penalty shoot outs. In the FA Cup or at international competitions (where obviously you can't play away goals) ET played between two tired teams afraid to lose is often a dull stalemate. I don't know what that stats are for LC v FA Cup ETs though.

We'd have lost to Bristol City in 1989 had away goals counted after ninety minutes and there would have been no Forest 3 Luton 1 at Wembley (which is my favourite ever game including my favourite ever goal). So if for no other reason, I say it is a good rule.

This rule fuked us up in the play offs vs sheff utd tho

1-1 at home
2-2 away

 

[Francis Benali (on loan)]

This rule fuked us up in the play offs vs sheff utd tho

1-1 at home
2-2 away

Yeah, but I'd prefer to win a Cup than get promoted. Not everybody would. There should be a poll for this.

 

[888balluk]

Another great innovative idea from uefa has resulted in zero chance of pot 1 countries not qualifying by opening up the finals to 24 teams.

What a borefest in store for England's qualification.