Simon Takel

I was forced to stop playing football for the same reason & at the same age as #LeonBarnett It’s important to raise awareness that heart conditions can hit anyone at any age. @TheBHF do great work & donations are always appreciated.

@HQNewsNow @DeborahMeaden #vibes #accidentalpartridge

Q: I'm wondering what your most favored Bible verses are? Trump: Well, uh... I wouldn't want to get into it because to me that's very personal, so I don't want to get into verses. Q: There's no verse that means a lot to you? Are you an Old Testament guy or a New Testament guy? Trump: Uh... Probablyyyyyy... equal

@PAPER0GA @HothLord90 @TerribleMaps He chose ‘Indiana’ himself. His actual name is Henry.

@HothLord90 @TerribleMaps And 😳so, how did he get his name?

Can I name my child after a state? Submitted by Mike Yamiolkoski

@PAPER0GA @TerribleMaps No, they didn’t.

@TerribleMaps His parents did.

@vimgov @henrywinter Someone obviously doesn’t watch Spanish, Italian or German football then.

@henrywinter The concept of VAR, in itself, is not wrong. It's it application, specially in the Premier League, which is greatly flawed. Dont think in Spain, Italy, Germany or even at International level they cause that much controversies.

Premier League fans deliver damning verdict on VAR. 75% of 7,946 fans polled by the Football Supporters’ Association “didn’t support the use of VAR”. Too long, too forensic, too much of a joy killer, fans say. Findings shared with Premier League and PGMO. 92% of fans surveyed “agreed” that “VAR has removed the spontaneous joy of goal celebrations” (82% of them “strongly agreed”). 85% of match-going fans “strongly disagreed” with the notion that “VAR makes watching football more enjoyable”. And 83% of those watching on TV. 85% of match-going fans “strongly disagreed” that “VAR decisions are generally resolved in a reasonable amount of time”. Echoed by 83% of those watching on TV. Only 18% agreed that “VAR has improved the overall accuracy of refereeing decisions”. 72% are “concerned about the expansion of VAR beyond its current remit”. 79% “strongly disagreed” with the suggestion “that the match-going experience is better with VAR”. 67% “strongly agreed” that they preferred “watching games that are played without VAR to games with VAR”. 84% “strongly support” goal-line technology. 34% “strongly opposed” to the idea of a challenge system (two per game per team). “These findings back up the FSA's previous survey in 2021, where fans expressed misgivings about the introduction of VAR,” says Thomas Concannon, @WeAreTheFSAPremier League network manager. “The vast majority are reporting the same concerns five years on - the loss of spontaneity when celebrating goals, and an overall worsening of the match-going experience. We have shared the survey results with the Premier League and PGMO, and look forward to discussing its findings with them.” Fans surveyed of all PL clubs and all ages (Under-18 to 65+).

Has football become too complicated, or was it always this way? ♦️ The confusing handball law ♦️ Subjective offside calls ♦️ The crazy world of "deliberate play" ♦️ Double jeopardy + advantage 📺 Of course, VAR 🎉 And it's going to get worse! 👇 bbc.co.uk/sport/football…

@FootballCliches - adjudication on these, please? The lowest acceptable value of x in this sentence: ‘team A & team B were involved in an x-goal thriller’. I think x= 5? For a game to ‘have everything’ what *must* it include? I think own goal, red card, penalty, great goal?

"VAR works fine everywhere else," we always hear in England. But is there really a Utopian world of VAR in Europe's top leagues? A look at how VAR is viewed in Germany, Spain, Italy and France. A story of fan protests, player anger, and frustration. 👇 bbc.co.uk/sport/football…

@FootballCliches Yeah, agreed - these are great. Just shows what a difficult job referees have too.

There is some relentlessly dreadful/pointless football content these days, but I glean something from every RefCam release, I think it's great x.com/footballontnt/…

Ah, this gentle, certificate-U, ref-to-player banter is nice, I like it

@DaleJohnsonBBC What amazes me is that this has been in place for nearly 5 years and yet there are still (seemingly) thousands of people who don’t understand this.

To explain the VAR offside tolerance level a tiny bit more. Width of red line is effectively the tolerance level. So Joe Willock is offside by the tolerance level + the top of his head. Unfortunately whatever offside measure you use it's impossible to avoid these. #TOTNEW

@UtdMicah It was used here (and always is) the single red line shows the offside was tight and even with the 5cm tolerance it shows he was offside.

They came up with a magical 5cm rule that’s not been used since just to allow Liverpool’s goal btw. Such a joke cancelling goals out for that small of a margin, can’t expect the rules to be applied when it’s not to benefit Liverpool, though.

@WASNAPPER @FA_PGMOL The angle of the image shown to us for the graphic is irrelevant in terms of the offside decision - if the angle was in line across the pitch the players and the offside line would still be in the same position - it would just be harder for us viewers to see.

Two genuine questions for @FA_PGMOL 1. Can you guarantee this was the players exact position when the ball left the passers foot and how? 2. Who chooses the angle of the graphic that shows it was offside? Another angle aligned to the line drawn would show it to be onside.

@sarikamon7 @Lewie75 @manutdirishreds It applies to every automated offside in the Premier League - but it’s only going to be noticed when the decision is so close that the lines are touching and therefore the image just shows one line, which includes the 5cm tolerance (benefit to the attacker)

@Lewie75 @manutdirishreds And used once for the Wirtz offside.

Something needs to be done about these offsides. Giving offsides for an inch in ruining the game and they need to change it so that if you’re half a body or so ahead your offside anything less like pics below should be level and should stand.

@manutdirishreds It’s more than that though as you’re not accounting for the 5cm tolerance. So (in your example) it’s actually 1 inch + 5cm

@CMacIver11 @beardy5 @honigstein Or if this happened with the score at 0-0. Imagine the outcry of the goal was allowed to stand with no red card and then Szoboszlai then scored the equaliser.

@beardy5 @honigstein I keep asking the common sense crew if the logic still applies in the case that Haaland flattens him with a 2-footer through the calfs instead of just a shirt pull. Still common sense just to ignore the clear foul?

It’s neither that deep nor difficult. 1. There‘s no „two fouls cancel each other out“ provision in the laws. There can’t be. 2. Haaland scored an illegal goal. 3. Since there was no goal, Szoboszlai‘s foul is DOGSO. Any other outcome would be absurd.

@Hesketh_CW @bondy888 @DaleJohnsonBBC @MarshallTitan1 @bfcgpg It’s written guidance on how the laws should be interpreted for the competition in which referees are refereeing. Hence why some laws are interpreted differently in European competitions and in domestic competitions. See @DaleJohnsonBBC

@simontakel @bondy888 @DaleJohnsonBBC @MarshallTitan1 @bfcgpg Bullshit. You've gone from written interpretation to written guidance. Which is which? Written guidance is not law.

This is a clear penalty and clear red card (as it's pulling) How has it not been given? One for @DaleJohnsonBBC to explain...

@MarshallTitan1 @Hesketh_CW @bondy888 @DaleJohnsonBBC @bfcgpg It doesn’t matter what Guehi thinks will happen - it’s the actual impact on the player that the referee will consider.

@simontakel @Hesketh_CW @bondy888 @DaleJohnsonBBC @bfcgpg If guehi didn’t think he would impact Salah’s ability to play the ball, he wouldn’t have pulled his shirt would he? So if the bloke doing it thinks that, why would the referee override that ? Guehi wouldn’t have done it otherwise would he?

@Hesketh_CW @bondy888 @DaleJohnsonBBC @MarshallTitan1 @bfcgpg There is written guidance on how the laws should be interpreted (see @DaleJohnsonBBC ). It’s only an offence if it impacts on the opposition player. Of course it’s subjective - lots of the laws in football are and why VAR or referees will never please everyone.

@simontakel @bondy888 @DaleJohnsonBBC @MarshallTitan1 @bfcgpg There is nothing in law 12 that talks about impacting ability to play the ball. Shirt pulling is classified as a holding offence punishable by a direct/indirect/penalty kick. What you’re talking about is the subjective interpretation introduced by the FA and PGMOL.

The issue with saying referees should use “common sense” and ignore the rules is that A) Common sense isn’t that common B) The second a referee ignores the rules and uses “common sense” and it goes against you, you’re absolutely losing your head It’s nice to think they can do it in principle, but it’s entirely impractical

@Hesketh_CW @bondy888 @DaleJohnsonBBC @MarshallTitan1 @bfcgpg Not if you read the interpretation of law 12. The shirt pull or holding actually has to be enough to impact the ability of the opposition player to play the ball.

@simontakel @bondy888 @DaleJohnsonBBC @MarshallTitan1 @bfcgpg It should be according to law 12. It isn’t because referees are applying discretion and this has inevitably introduced subjectivity and inconsistencies into the game

Fans will hate it, pundits won't like it, and football will turn its nose up too. Yet when a goal is scored only because of a foul there is no way it could be allowed to stand. Analysis of Man City's VAR-disallowed goal at Liverpool. #LIVMCI 👇 bbc.co.uk/sport/football…