Russell Barton

@whosaghirlie @andydaviesref Could you explain?If a ball is in play (law 9) goes in the goal & ”no offence has been committed by the team scoring the goal” it is a goal (law12).There is no provision to chalk off goals caused by other mistakes (eg wrongly awarded free kick).England did not commit an offence

@ruskellbarton @andydaviesref Yes you are!

So there is a possibility the ball touched the overhead TV cable, however there is not conclusive evidence. Equally, without an immediate request from the referee, VAR would not have this in their consideration to check - why would they! + Once play has restarted this cannot to corrected even with evidence. #FIFAWorldCup need to be more transparent and explain this, however they’ve created doubt, distrust and in some cases low integrity. This incident is a freak situation, whether it did or didn’t, it can happen - however the bigger issue is the trust and integrity of the competition itself.

@andydaviesref suggests that if it goes directly in the goal from an outside agent the goal stands “goal is awarded.. even if contact is made with the ball” so it makes little sense to me that it should be ruled out if a non-continuing interference with the ball occurred earlier.

@andydaviesref Perhaps I’m reading the rules wrong but I don’t see that’s in the laws to rule out such a goal even with evidence. 1. The VAR protocol category a “Goal/no goal” has 4 bullet points and this doesn’t fit in any of them . 2. Law 5 section “Outside interference”

@m8ersammich @wubear_mixer @matthewdmarsden The rule is written with an ongoing interference in mind eg an extra ball that needs to be cleared from the pitch. The rule isn’t clear if anything should happen if an interference is in the past indeed if the ball is going in the goal it says it shouldn’t be stopped.

@wubear_mixer @matthewdmarsden That rule is crystal clear as to what is supposed to happen.

I would be embarassed to make a big deal about this. They had ample opportunity to defend against England, and they didn’t. Sour grapes.

@KBTrumpKamala @AlbertsideB Having systems that produce Men’s Golds+increased focus on football doesn’t guarantee footballers. China’s success is based on schools+whole nation system and doesn’t seem good for football. The US NCAA system works very well for some sports eg swimming but not others eg tennis.

@ruskellbarton @AlbertsideB Your post doesnt negate anything I said? Not discrediting China but a bunch of their medals are in sports we dont pipeline, 4 from diving and 4 from shooting

No argument is being misunderstood, it’s just the exceptionalism is confusing. The rest of the world too, especially in Europe and Africa, have people that would be physically geared to the NFL if there was investment in that here, but there isn’t! The argument is pointless!

@KBTrumpKamala @AlbertsideB The last Olympics had 156 Golds in men’s events- China won 17, USA 13, JPN 12, France 11, UZB 7. Football is a top 2 team sport in those 3 Asian countries and none have reached a WC QF. The US produces fewer male Olympic champions than China but USMNT is much better than China.

@AlbertsideB Well the olympics suggests it would, considering the US' success in a ton of different sports that it truly cares about. Swimming, T&F, Gymnastics, womens soccer etc.

@FergusCraig Cameroon in 90?

In my lifetime, I think that might be the first World Cup classic match England have been in that they’ve actually won.

@therealrthorat @bambasaregood @FerretGee Soccer was indeed a common slang term in the UK even in the 1980s and only fell out of use in the 90s (possibly related to the 94 WC) but it’s never been a more common name with UK fans than “football” and it is not the original term.

@ruskellbarton @bambasaregood @FerretGee Official names are entirely separate from the names used by fans. This is the whole point. That's how "soccer" came about in the UK.

Dear Americans it’s football not soccer. FIFA - Fédération Internationale de Football Association The clue is in the name. Thanks for your attention to this matter.

@therealrthorat @bambasaregood @FerretGee In the US colleges used the FA’s rules in the 1860s but switched to Rugby rules in the 1870s. The American Football Association was founded in 1884 using FA rules and its FIFA member successor of 1913 was the USFootballFed which did not change its name to USSoccerFF until 1945

@therealrthorat @bambasaregood @FerretGee The primary name for the game since 1863 has always been just “football” which is also the official formal name in the UK. Football Clubs that preferred Rugby rules to the FA’s maintained their FC naming but since 1871 called their game “rugby football” not just “football”

@therealrthorat @bambasaregood @FerretGee It was a popular slang term that arose over 20 years after the FA was founded but it was never more popular than the term “football” & has never been used in an official/formal manner in the UK. Even “Association” before football has not been used by the FA or IFAB (or the IOC)

@bambasaregood @FerretGee Yeah, that's the crazy thing. Soccer was actually the original name. Well, it was the slang term that was more popular b/c "Association Football" was a lot to say & didn't really distinguish it. These people keep lecturing Americans for using the original name of the sport.

@fisovil2012 @travismillerx13 Plus splits from the Cooper Hill Cheese Rollers as some of them have done 180m in 13 s.

@travismillerx13 Why is there an all conditions list? If we accept illegal conditions then we should have a list with doping athletes too What are the rules for?

🇮🇹Marcell Jacobs now second on the 100m all conditions list behind 🇯🇲Usain Bolt.

@MolitorisNick @1WeakGuttedDog It’s the World Cup run by the International Hockey Federation featuring the sport the IOC calls by its official name “hockey”.

@1WeakGuttedDog What fucking hockey are you talking about 😭😭😭😭😭😭

We are the best in the world 🇦🇺 Eat ten bags of dicks USA 🇺🇸

@THE_REAL_CH3 @mjbop A lot of that is off. Games like hockey were played on foot and never called football. There were no horseback ballgames in England before 1863. Rules for different forms of football varied but scoring was always based on kicking inc in early Rugby. Soccer was not a formal name…

It's not called football because you use your feet to play with a ball. The term football originally referred to any game that was played on foot rather than on horseback. Out of that group of ballgames a number of different codes were eventually developed. For example there was one game that involved carrying the ball and trying to get into the final part of the field at the end or trying to kick the ball OVER a crossbar. That game was eventually formalized and codified into a sport at an English boarding school called the Rugby School. That form of football eventually just became known as "Rugby" instead of just football (the organization in charge of the sport in England is the RFU, Rugby FOOTBALL Union). Then there was another form of football that involved not using the hands and attempting to kick a ball UNDER a crossbar. This game was formalized after the founding in London of the group that named itself the Football Association. So the game they played was called Association Football. Over some years that got shortened to Assoc, and then changed to soccer. Within Britain (and therefore the wider Anglosphere) the terms "soccer" and "football" were interchangeable. Use of soccer was associated with the upper class, while the working class used football. The use of both terms lasted until the 1960s when the upper class had lost most of their influence and "football" became the default name. But in places like the US, Canada, Australia, and even Ireland where other codes of football were not only common but more popular that transition never took place. So really this is all just a way of saying it's all the fault of the English, so take it up with them.

dude, it's literally called FOOTball - it isn't arbitrary, it's a game where you use your feet to play with a ball fvcking usamericans, man

@Peston Shades of Redwood backing Ken Clarke.

The most significant Labour development that could happen today, according to several senior Labour sources, is that Burnham and Streeting could do “a deal”, which would see Streeting coming out in support of Burnham in return for a post in a Burnham cabinet. “Wes just wants to be part of a team that can win against Farage,” said one of his supporters

@gdholtby @SebMilbank Are you equally shocked when fine dining restaurants offer a cheese board? Would you send that back to be cooked? A compulsion for cheese to always be melted is very strange.

@SebMilbank We are well aware you have the ability; that’s what makes the cold cheese lump “sandwich” especially baffling. You have the technology but obstinately refuse to apply it, apparently out of some perverse need for self-punishment.

Americans have no idea, just no clue whatsoever, of the sheer majesty and extent of the British ability to melt cheese on bread

@Strangeland_Elf I was referring to the older ball sport which is called hockey by the IOC and governed by the International Hockey Federation FIH rather than the sport the IOC calls Ice Hockey governed by the IIHF. That hockey was played in 19C public schools alongside precodified football.

@ruskellbarton Hockey doesn’t have a ball and it’s played on skates.

Well you see, “football” was actually a term used for ball-based sports that you play ON foot, rather than on horseback. Not a term a term implying that you kick a ball with your foot. Which is why rugby was called “rugby football”. The problem with referring to any sport simply as “football” is that it is a general term rather than specific, causing a tad bit of confusion.

@eharrison321 @ItsAndyRyan Seems unlikely to me given that in every early version of football that I know of points only came from connecting a foot with a ball. That includes the version played at Rugby school and the Eton Wall game. In contrast games like Hockey, Hurling etc were never called football.

@ItsAndyRyan I recently read that football is so named as a game played on foot, as opposed to horseback. Maybe apocryphal but gives more weight to the American argument

I used to get riled by Americans using the word soccer, but their arguments for it have convinced me it's petty to object to it given a) Britain invented the term in the first place, and b) There are lots of other games called football, not just America's.

@Dinzerama @mreasycredit @loganalbright73 Yes and yet it’s pronounced as part of the same syllable as “org” from the other word, so pronouncing o and p in the same syllable in biopic would not be that unusual.

@ruskellbarton @mreasycredit @loganalbright73 I think the b comes from the cyber part of cybernetic organism

I routinely make the point that dictionary editors are not the arbiters of how people ought to speak. Their role should be purely descriptive. Every sensible person knows that biopic rhymes with myopic, and the Merriam-Webster people have no authority to say otherwise.