Comments by "David Aspinall" (@yt.personal.identification) on "" video.

  1. They are against the rules. They just choose which rules to enforce.
    4
  2. No rules has an "intent" clause... because it is foolish and impossible to enforce.
    2
  3. Adding a judgement of intent to ANY rule is just ridiculous. The action is judged. It is IMPOSSIBLE to judge intent. It will be exploited, guaranteed.
    2
  4. So it was equal for all players. Got it.
    2
  5. Why should the person who fouls get an advantage?
    1
  6. @Bamboodonutz  No player is trying to score an own goal. Perhaps if they don't intend to score then maybe it shouldn't count... right?
    1
  7. @Bamboodonutz  When the ball slips through the keepers hands, it is NOT a foul. It's a false equivalence
    1
  8. @HO-bz7xd  Accidental second touch scenario. Ready? The penalty is taken, the save comes out, and ACCIDENTALLY hits the penalty taker and goes in. Does that count? The scenario fits the proposed rule.
    1
  9. @HO-bz7xd  You could 2 foot the ball, claim it was an accident, and get a look at the keeper. Then get a second chance. No rule deals with intent because you can not tell intent.
    1
  10. @Rainmakeroffire  Objectively false
    1
  11. @HO-bz7xd  How many new rules do you need to ensure professional footballers who make a mistake are able to get a mulligan?
    1
  12.  @Rainmakeroffire  There is no intention clause for handball. That is introduced by some referees interpretation. Big difference
    1
  13. @Rainmakeroffire  Obvious and deliberate. This does not cover all intent, only the blatant
    1
  14.  @mlsarchitect  A Spanish football team whining and blaming the referee for their own flaws is the real perpetual crime here.
    1
  15. Why?
    1