Cowshed

We may or we might not. When a defensive line is that high do you want your keeper to contest a ball with his own team mates. I would not.

That is not necessarily a psychological problem. The team players may not have the ability to consistently deal with the physical. There ability feeds tactical flexibility to control the physical. If the former is not present that then has an impact on mindset. Being braver in possession works in a similar manner. Mindset follows ability. Decision making follows ability.

Bristol City lads have been there before for a game v Brazil and? Drank in a gated complex for tourists. Drinking alcohol was restricted and it is exceptionally expensive. Years later. Drinking alcohol is stiil restricted and it is exceptionally expensive. It will be unlike any other tournament.

Citys keepers are consistently asked to stay. The keepers do not routinely ignore instruction. City get compact and generally drop when defending balls in obvious areas of the pitch. This means there is less space between the keeper and defenders for the keeper to control, and more traffic to get through for the keeper. The outcome has to be the keeper doesnt come for crosses consistently, and should not unless its in their zone.. The keeper coach is highly unlikely to advise Mr Pearson. The keeper coach is there to work on the intent of the Manager - They do what they are told.

Skill is defined in coaching as something you can perform on demand. A few tricks and performing inconsistently is not being skillful.

Refs are constantly reviewed. Refs receive external feedback from clubs. It is a small part of evaluation and progression and otherwise. A referee does not progress or stay at the peak of the game by having failings. External feedback frequently is not of high quality. Feedback (?) frequently is not evidence based or constructive. In regards to laws of the game IFAB are responsible not the FA etc.

The FA run open forums for coaches, Managers and clubs. Primarily for rule changes. They are quite open. Whats the point of external feedback? If referees fall below standards they are demoted.

I do not the Premier league officials limited, the FA, and the intenational body IFAB do.

I didn't post an apology. The development process to become a referee is rigorous and referess now make less quantifiable mistakes than they did ten years ago. Refereeing efficiency is measured and standards are high. Championship ref efficiency compares favourably to that of counterparts across Europe, so unless the standard of refereeing across Europe has dropped (it has not) standards are not shit as you put it.

It isn't. The standard of refs is of a higher standard due to the rigourous development process.

You do not need supreme fitness to create neural pathways. The process requires repetition. The quality of the repetition enhances the process and this can mean a individual in football doesnt have to have beyond a moderate fitness level to create skill. Myelination is enhanced by intensity of training (football), its focus v physicality, and this then internalises the task. Off tangent .. Myelination can be stimulated by visualisation.

Exactly. Thats an external factor, Humans have not changed. He would still possess the characteristics of what made him exceptional. The keystone qualities have not altered. Our understanding of training methodology has. Charlton exceptional talent would be accentuated with modern football training, as would be any other individual. Yes the characteristics of what made them professional footballers has not changed. Their qualities would still be vital to their progress. The players would be improved further. These players created their great. The extrinsic and intrinsic drivers of what made them great remains in any era. What we see is people dont think think about how players became great. Its not arbitrary dictated by an age. Great players have distinguishing factors that transend any era, growth mindset, fight response, how humans acquire and create their skills , how axons work, myelination occurs doesnt change.

Charlton was not a good player. He was a great one. You appear to be saying that a player at the zenith of the game could not make it now because humans are now different?

Central midfielders in Charlton time generally ran sub five miles, it’s now frequently beyond six, that is not x 10. Skill isn't overtly physical, it’s the result of deliberate practice and its neural, humans create muscle memory via training and repetition. To have the skill set Charlton possessed the player has to have a growth mindset to create his skill level. Skill is a nurtured talent that can be performed on demand. To state a exceptional player then wouldn’t be now is a rather odd argument because the driver of why these players were exceptional is being removed. If the player was advanced across aspects of technical, tactical, physical, psychological well they would still be advanced now. Todays human is not a new species.

It’s a consideration of team intent. The probability of losing possession in challenging areas impacts decisions. Throwing the ball up the line keeps the team in a defensive shape. There the primary focus is not retaining possession because players won’t be in relational distances to the ball to receive and retrain it, they will be in positions to defend the ball. Possession based teams will behave differently because the focus from throw ins is possession, and the opportunity this provides v the impact (fear) of losing the ball. Training. Throw ins are not necessarily a other thing. The relational distances of wanting to keep the ball are little different to goal kicks and free kicks. Angles, diamonds, triangles are superior to flat and vertical if you want to keep the ball consistently.,

The dryest wit in South Bristol. Top bloke. RIP.

Or a consequence of team intent. If the player was being asked to be conservative in possession and consistently retain the ball he would be failing. The player is being asked to play very positively. A feature of play is how often the player attempts to switch play and break lines.

Modern stadium design cuts down on reverberation time levels. This is because of sight lines, the c diff in techy speak of the roof which will be of an optimal angle for viewing, but means sound dissipates(quietens) quicker.

This is what I mean about abuse of refs being normalised. The if is not an if, its a when for refs including minors. That is a certainty. The intense focus on refs and its consequences is not viewed as a problem, the refs are the problem. Its a skewed compass. VAR as I predicted has by its nature of highlighting error does not foster respect for officials. An improvement would be to turn the acute reflection on to Managers, players, and their behaviours.

No ifs. Referees being abused, threatened and intimidated by spectators, parents and Mangers at grass roots level is common. The culture of abuse and disrespect can be seen on TV, it’s been normalised. I would suggest that the anchoring in of poor behaviour into the game should be challenged and measures put in place to diminish the disrespect towards officialdom, instead of forensic focus being placed on honest humans who have worked hard to be where they who will make occasional errors I see the allocations at varying levels. I see teams wiith no ref for a month, then for a game followed by no ref again for six weeks in junior football. Leagues (junior) are now going down the route of abuse the ref lose the ref. Poor behaved teams don't get the refs the game already hasn't got, and this penalises obviously teams that behave themselves. Remedies for numbers has to be pay refs more. Thats not a remedy for how refs are treated, its superficial, you will be paid more because you are going to be treated abysmally on occasions. Control has to start at the top.

Or be the Bristol ref who had to call the police to get out of a car park after a U12 game due to parents surrounding his car. This is not exceptional. Threats and abuse of refs including children has become nomal. We have junior leagues in Bristol that have ran out of refereees. Entire divisions can have NO refs. A precipice has been passed where the game loses far more refs than it recruits. 7000 refs give up a season. In ten years time? The round the clock focus on refs and poor performance (which data does not support) is misplaced and damaging the game.

If they have people working in the home office and the Ministry of defence etc, and they will, they then have access to whats called Operation London Bridge. Each Monarch has a protocal named after a bridge to be followed in the case of their death. Queen Elizabeths London Bridge has been in place for a significant period.

Enforcement and a indirect free kick as a sanction isn't the general first stage, its warning/warnings. Enforcement and a indirect free kick as the first action does occur, but its so rare there are only a couple of obvious examples over ten years.

The rule is still six seconds. Check the laws of the game for fouls and misconduct.

Yes, there is meant to be instruction to alter that behaviour and others that slow the game down.. Pickford takes a minute to take a goal kick. Forster is the top theatrical diver and is recording past thirty seconds to succumb a dead ball. The possible offence has always been there. Check with refs because it can fall under differing things. What’s happened to the instruction generally? I don’t know.