Women's World Cup 2019, France

[bodecea]

Poop! 1 - 1

 

[noonereal]

2-1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tommy Tainant]

If there was no offside the game would degenerate. What would happen is that teams would stick a couple of big thugs near the goal and hoof the ball forward. Its then a percentage game because at some point your man will get on the end of one of
them. Exciting for a little while but ultimately tedious.

The off side rule could be altered, but not altogether abandoned. It could be tailored in order to open things up a bit.
I don't expect that would happen, but it would be nice.

They altered it a few years back to make it more in favour of the attackers.Now if you are level you get the benefit of the doubt. They also introduced the concept of "interfering with play". You could be offside if you were on the touch line and nowhere near the action. Now you get a pass for that. Generally its better for that but it does put the onus on the Ref and their interpretation of what constitutes "interfering".

Generally the ref and the fans have different views on this issue.

They have also tried paintng lines across the pitch to increase the area where you cant be offside but it never really worked.

If you think the footie rules are onerous you should steer clear of rugby.

 

[bodecea]

Pretty. Their passing is better this game.

 

[boedicca]

Like other women's sports, they get paid less because they don't draw as large of an audience as men's teams. Meaning the women bring in far less revenue for the league and the owners. ...

If they got paid the same as men, we'd see men posing as Trannies playing instead of real women.

 

[bodecea]

If there was no offside the game would degenerate. What would happen is that teams would stick a couple of big thugs near the goal and hoof the ball forward. Its then a percentage game because at some point your man will get on the end of one of
them. Exciting for a little while but ultimately tedious.

The off side rule could be altered, but not altogether abandoned. It could be tailored in order to open things up a bit.
I don't expect that would happen, but it would be nice.

They altered it a few years back to make it more in favour of the attackers.Now if you are level you get the benefit of the doubt. They also introduced the concept of "interfering with play". You could be offside if you were on the touch line and nowhere near the action. Now you get a pass for that. Generally its better for that but it does put the onus on the Ref and their interpretation of what constitutes "interfering".

Generally the ref and the fans have different views on this issue.

They have also tried paintng lines across the pitch to increase the area where you cant be offside but it never really worked.

If you think the footie rules are onerous you should steer clear of rugby.

Having played, been a coach, AND a ref....the hardest job is that of the side ARs, IMO.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

If there was no offside the game would degenerate. What would happen is that teams would stick a couple of big thugs near the goal and hoof the ball forward. Its then a percentage game because at some point your man will get on the end of one of
them. Exciting for a little while but ultimately tedious.

The off side rule could be altered, but not altogether abandoned. It could be tailored in order to open things up a bit.
I don't expect that would happen, but it would be nice.

They altered it a few years back to make it more in favour of the attackers.Now if you are level you get the benefit of the doubt. They also introduced the concept of "interfering with play". You could be offside if you were on the touch line and nowhere near the action. Now you get a pass for that. Generally its better for that but it does put the onus on the Ref and their interpretation of what constitutes "interfering".

Generally the ref and the fans have different views on this issue.

They have also tried paintng lines across the pitch to increase the area where you cant be offside but it never really worked.

If you think the footie rules are onerous you should steer clear of rugby.

Having played, been a coach, AND a ref....the hardest job is that of the side ARs, IMO.

They are split second decisions and easy to get wrong.

 

[bodecea]

If there was no offside the game would degenerate. What would happen is that teams would stick a couple of big thugs near the goal and hoof the ball forward. Its then a percentage game because at some point your man will get on the end of one of
them. Exciting for a little while but ultimately tedious.

The off side rule could be altered, but not altogether abandoned. It could be tailored in order to open things up a bit.
I don't expect that would happen, but it would be nice.

They altered it a few years back to make it more in favour of the attackers.Now if you are level you get the benefit of the doubt. They also introduced the concept of "interfering with play". You could be offside if you were on the touch line and nowhere near the action. Now you get a pass for that. Generally its better for that but it does put the onus on the Ref and their interpretation of what constitutes "interfering".

Generally the ref and the fans have different views on this issue.

They have also tried paintng lines across the pitch to increase the area where you cant be offside but it never really worked.

If you think the footie rules are onerous you should steer clear of rugby.

Having played, been a coach, AND a ref....the hardest job is that of the side ARs, IMO.

They are split second decisions and easy to get wrong.

And, in reality, you have to be looking in two different directions at once.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Englands left side is weak and the US can do whatever they want down there. Game should be over by now.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

If there was no offside the game would degenerate. What would happen is that teams would stick a couple of big thugs near the goal and hoof the ball forward. Its then a percentage game because at some point your man will get on the end of one of
them. Exciting for a little while but ultimately tedious.

The off side rule could be altered, but not altogether abandoned. It could be tailored in order to open things up a bit.
I don't expect that would happen, but it would be nice.

They altered it a few years back to make it more in favour of the attackers.Now if you are level you get the benefit of the doubt. They also introduced the concept of "interfering with play". You could be offside if you were on the touch line and nowhere near the action. Now you get a pass for that. Generally its better for that but it does put the onus on the Ref and their interpretation of what constitutes "interfering".

Generally the ref and the fans have different views on this issue.

They have also tried paintng lines across the pitch to increase the area where you cant be offside but it never really worked.

If you think the footie rules are onerous you should steer clear of rugby.

Having played, been a coach, AND a ref....the hardest job is that of the side ARs, IMO.

They are split second decisions and easy to get wrong.

And, in reality, you have to be looking in two different directions at once.

And of course we know that they are all visually impaired.

 

[bodecea]

The off side rule could be altered, but not altogether abandoned. It could be tailored in order to open things up a bit.
I don't expect that would happen, but it would be nice.

They altered it a few years back to make it more in favour of the attackers.Now if you are level you get the benefit of the doubt. They also introduced the concept of "interfering with play". You could be offside if you were on the touch line and nowhere near the action. Now you get a pass for that. Generally its better for that but it does put the onus on the Ref and their interpretation of what constitutes "interfering".

Generally the ref and the fans have different views on this issue.

They have also tried paintng lines across the pitch to increase the area where you cant be offside but it never really worked.

If you think the footie rules are onerous you should steer clear of rugby.

Having played, been a coach, AND a ref....the hardest job is that of the side ARs, IMO.

They are split second decisions and easy to get wrong.

And, in reality, you have to be looking in two different directions at once.

And of course we know that they are all visually impaired.

Not as much as baseball umps.

 

[Fang]

US Team looks great. Just gotta hold that lead! England is their biggest challenge yet. Rose Lavelle is crushing it!!!

 

[Fang]

Press starting over Rapinoe!

I love Press but I want I'd rather have Rapinoe and sit princess Morgan.

Both Press and Morgan score!

 

[bodecea]

US Team looks great. Just gotta hold that lead! England is their biggest challenge yet. Rose Lavelle is crushing it!!!

Yes, Lavelle was not doing well last game...now she looks good.

 

[bodecea]

Amazing save on the PK...and now England down 1 player.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Amazing save on the PK...and now England down 1 player.

Wasnt a penalty in my view.

 

[bodecea]

Amazing save on the PK...and now England down 1 player.

Wasnt a penalty in my view.

Same here....they have a saying in volleyball, "The ball doesn't lie." Bad PK call, stopped PK kick.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Amazing save on the PK...and now England down 1 player.

Wasnt a penalty in my view.

Same here....they have a saying in volleyball, "The ball doesn't lie." Bad PK call, stopped PK kick.

To be fair its the only decision they got wrong.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Neville moaning about the ref over the sending off.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

If there was no offside the game would degenerate. What would happen is that teams would stick a couple of big thugs near the goal and hoof the ball forward. Its then a percentage game because at some point your man will get on the end of one of
them. Exciting for a little while but ultimately tedious.

I didn't watch the game but understand the US came through and a late goal by England was disallowed due to....
offside call verified by VAR review.

That's ironic, isn't it?