In felt that the challenge on Rashford was a pen as Demichels got nowhere near the ball and made pretty solid contact with Rashford preventing him getting to the ball after he had beaten him. Those saying he should not have fallen are talking rubbish - even had he wanted to stay up the force of the challenge would have made that very hard. (Btw what a terrible game for Demichels - beaten for the goal, should have given a pen away, responsible for Hart being injured and now out for a spell - and they say Skrtel had a bad game )

I thought the Smalling one should have been a second yellow as that type of challenge is almost always a card - felt he gave the benefit of the doubt due to the match it was but really that should not happen - you judge a challenge on its merits.

By the third or fourth replay i had made my mind up on the CFC incident - foul but outside the box, yellow the correct colour card - but the officials only get one view and it is so hard to be sure so all in all they did OK.


There is no such rule about advantage to the attacker - that is heresay introduced into the game by pundits who do not know the laws - and it annoys me!! - the times players say this to me when I ref and it is simply nonsense!!

I do agree tho that many offsides are very marginal and there have been quite a few that were simply wrong.

The office rule heavily favours the defender rather than the attacker.

I'm left wondering what goes on in your office...

Bloody hell I made a mess of that!

There's a law that in the U.K, if a Scotsman enters Leeds in full armour, than a Yorkshireman can shoot him with a bow and arrow. It was one of those laws that never got repealed, when I read your post, that's what was going on in my head.

But yeah, the offside rule has always favoured defenders, which I suppose was the point of the rule in the first place, no?

This whole active, and inactive phase nonsense is ridiculous, and I thought they'd made a change to make things easier to understand at the start of either this season or last, but nothing seems to have changed from what I can see, except for, occasionally goals are given even with clear interference..

I prefer to have it as it is, worded to allow players who clearly aren't involved in play at the relevant moment not being flagged off and players who don't touch the ball but affect the defence's actions by their presence can be flagged.

No-one wants to see goals for our team chalked off just because someone strays slightly off but isn't actively involved, nor do we want the cheating dirty opposition to be able to score when an attacker's left knee was miles offside. Rules work both ways.

Well this might be a good test of where Leicester and their squad are against the big boys in Europe..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35872998

I sort of understand what you're saying, but at the same time, for me, if you're offside, your interfering with play, active or not. Just by being there, you're occupying a space a defender could be in, or putting them/the goalkeeper off..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35849556

England team named for tomorrow -

Butland

Clyne
Smalling
Cahil
Rose

Henderson
Dier

Lallana
Ali
Welbeck

Kane.

Ranieri will be pleased with that - 4 Spurs players and 0 Leicester

Sad news for Gazza as he looks to have relapsed again

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/pa...-a3211881.html

I know Twitter's great at bringing famous people in direct contact with their adoring public, but sometimes a little distance is ok, particularly in the case of Kevin Doyle posting a photo of his horrendous shin injury - https://twitter.com/KevinDoyle1983/s...90018824691712

Deary me, his really is a fall from grace.

He is going down the George Best route, and that is just so terribly sad to see, he has been given all the options to help himself, but if he is determined not to do so, then there is not much more anyone can do for him.

That's horrible

Jordan Henderson lol

I afraid it's not a relapse, he has simply never stopped drinking.

And what do you base that on?

If that is true, then that is even more of a shame, if no-one wants to help themselves, then there is not much anyone else can do for them.

Read the article

If he hadn't stopped at all he would be dead a fair while ago and this wouldn't be a story.

If he has stopped and started again, or carried on, either way, it is am incredibly sad story.

Defence is going to be a serious problem for England, I can envisage plenty of heart in mouth moments in the Euros

If Hodgson can get the rest of the time right though (i wouldn't hold my breath) England may well take beating

On paper France look lethal but traditionally they have flopped in plenty of majors.

I've a feeling we could get a "surprise" winner tbh. There's question marks over pretty much everyone in it

Not exactly a bad record in recent times. Winners of major tournaments in 98, 2000, finalists in 2006. I'd make them favourites.

There dont seem to be any stand out teams at the moment, you're right.
I'd favour Germany at the mo for the tournament

I hope Vardy gets to start on Tuesday

Germany would be my favourites as well, they have a very good squad of players to select from (although they are missing their World Cup winning captain).

It could very well be a great tournament to watch due to so many teams being in with a chance.