It's alright FFA will most likely allow a 4th Marquee to bring him home to one of the Sydney or Melbourne clubsOriginally Posted by lquiquer
It's alright FFA will most likely allow a 4th Marquee to bring him home to one of the Sydney or Melbourne clubs
Considering we got like 6-7 spots in the 23 to fill wasting one in this bloke is a dumb idea and criminal
Merrick is aware we have enough shit players already and he needs to be getting rid of the below par players not bringing them to the club??
Why cant we have 2 marquees tho? Milligan one, #10 the other?
Im thinking we're a good chance of getting Carrusca. Id rather see us aim higher for a #10, but he's still a decent player. Better than what we have at the moment
Typical Jerks dont perform hey here is a new contract?? Ohhh your injury prone even better
That's...actually not a bad idea.
Teams would be much less likely to kick the ball over the sideline if they knew it would result in essentially a very wide free kick.
All this video technology rubbish, and a simple idea like this one could be the most effective.
EDIT: But I guess then you would introduce the ploy of trying to boot the ball off a defender in an attacking position to get this wide free kick....
The only way it is an OK idea is if he is being paid SFA and even that is outside the salary cap, as he is a local player or whatever that rule is now.
WE DON'T DO WALKING AWAY !
I remember the discussion of kicks in comes up regularly
I not in favour of it as it just becomes another set piece
The players won't play it short to retain posession they will just hoof it into the mixer
Then the ref will do the usual and ping the attacking team for shirt pulling and the whole play comes to a standstill for another FK
Free kicks for throw ins? Only if it is applied fairly. I propose that only Sydney and Melbourne teams can trial this. Everyone else sticks to throwing it. That keeps the competition level.
Either way, Marc Warren is still stuffed.
The Championship Chronicles - The Jetstream's review of the 2007/08 season. www.newcastlefootball.net/chronicles
Easy way to end the chance of many penalty shoot outs is in 2nd half of extra time start reducing the number of players on the pitch every 5 minutes till we have a 8 v 8. Start the 2nd half ET 10 v10, 110th min 9 v 9 & 115th min 8v8. End the period of extra time with 8 v 8 which will open the game up.
It's not perfect but it alleviates the concerns of whinging do-gooders that constantly complain about the penalty shootout. My opinion is leave it as is with penalties at the end of extra time or go back to the old style of having a rematch in 3 days time.
I don't like the idea of just seeing the teams continue to slog it out indefinitely until someone scores and for the same reason I don't like the idea of removing players from the field. You could see in the GF game most of the players were so fatigued in the extra time. The quality of the product was significantly less and I think this will continue to decline as the game becomes more and more demanding with players squeezing every ounce of athleticism for the regular 90 minutes.
I don't like shootouts personally as I feel its similar to having a tie in a running race and deciding it by having the contestants compete in a bike race. They do have the pros of creating plenty of drama and excitement I guess as well as guaranteeing a winner. From this point of view I can accept penalties a bit, as the teams have had a fair amount of time to decide it in the allowed playing time. Its almost like stepping in and taking it out of their hands and saying "Well if you guys can't create a result, we'll soon sort that out".
The penalties before the ET idea I like from a logic point of view and the dynamic of having one team chasing a result and another who are content with standings would definitely be interesting. However not sure about it emotionally. Maybe just flip a coin before ET and whoever wins the toss is declared the winner if scores remain level. Could even alternate it, ie. Team A wins toss and is the 0-0 winner, but if scores go to 1-1 then Team B is winner. Or a different option, whoever reaches the eventual tied score first wins.
I dunno. Stick with pens
Last edited by Macca; 11-05-2017 at 12:46 PM.
Nope. I reckon that'd worsen the loss aversion, and extra time would become even more defensively focused.
Get rid of pens entirely, play extra time then a replay - stuff TV, surely a GF replay would raise more revenue for FFA?
I do like the idea of playing till a goal is scored, no matter what, a "timeless match". Sure it may come down to an error but it is about mental and phsyical toughness and will be down to the team generally. Would certainly be dramatic.
Leave it as it is..... FFS... Nothing wrong with current system.
**** the VAR too...
Amigos Aarau
Of course we can if Mr Lee wants to stump up the money. But be realistic, it's not going to happen.
Merrick's first presser he specifically stated a marquee #10 and a few experienced players.
This assumption that's passed off that Kanta gets re-signed because of the home grown allowance is complete bollocks. We save no more money than if we used the other allowances available.
Kanta gets re-signed because Merrick wants him. Unless we end up using both marquees.
I was kinda joking about the kick ins...soz..
Football is 100% perfect exactly as it is
Agreed but he isn't coming back to the HAL unless it's on marquee wages. Would go to the Victory not us
Baba Diawara has re-signed with Adelaide for 2 years
And refs could do throw ins like afl, rof
Posting Permissions
