Isnt this the most stupid rule in football ?

[RammyBlade]

Freeman gets booked for taking off his shirt to show some emotion at the death of his grandmother.
Celtic player got booked for simply putting his shirt over his head for just 3 seconds after scoring a goal in the OLd Firm match

How on earth are these types of things worth a booking especially compared to some cynical fould that get the same punishment !!
Its about time the rule makers changed this stupid rule

 

[Guesty]

It should never have been made a bookable offence in the first place, never mind the caveats when the shirt underneath has a message of some kind.

I remember the game after Gary Speed died. It was in the Cup and Evans scored. He lifted his shirt to reveal a message and several of our players (and I believe the opposition manager) went to the ref and asked him not to book Evans. To the ref's credit, he didn't book Evans, but politely requested after Evans scored a second that he not lift his shirt a second time, which Evans complied with. Just sensible, decent behaviour from everyone on that occasion.

 

[Blade56]

It's a little known rule that you get a straight red for waving yer cock about in celibration.

 

[Ginger Gnome]

At one point everyone seemed to start taking their shirt off when they scored, and started having more and more elaborate messages on their tops, then you had players with sponsor messages on their undershirts. Things like Ian Wright's Just Done It Nike t-shirt when he broke Arsenal's scoring record made sense, but was a blatant bit of advertising, some players started wearing multiple undershirts with different messages if they scored more than once, if they took off too many layers they had to sort all the shirts out again, or some threw their shirts into the crowd and had to go back to the bench to get a new one and it started causing ridiculous delays.

In general I don't think it should be a booking, but people taking ages to get re-dressed, putting political massages or adverts under their shirts is what ruined it for most people with a simple RIP or dedication to someone in their family underneath.

 

[SwitchBLADE Smiles]

It's a little known rule that you get a straight red for waving yer cock about in celibration.

Celebratory windmilling being a straight red, is the reason why I stopped attending games.

Rediculous.

 

[shorehamview]

Then you've got morons like Diego Forlan who can't even get dressed without their carer to help them.

 

[Blade82]

I saw the clip recently of Billy do it for Donny after they lost their little one and the message read 'that's for you son' and never got booked rightly so. Common sense should have prevailed yesterday too

 

[bertieblade]

Marcelo v Coventry. Took of his shirt, to reveal another Utd shirt underneath

 

[FattyFatterson]

Freeman gets booked for taking off his shirt to show some emotion at the death of his grandmother.
Celtic player got booked for simply putting his shirt over his head for just 3 seconds after scoring a goal in the OLd Firm match

How on earth are these types of things worth a booking especially compared to some cynical fould that get the same punishment !!
Its about time the rule makers changed this stupid rule

It's only one of the ridiculous rules in place at the moment. The other main one being when a player who wins a free kick after being fouled, has to go off the pitch once treatment has finished on the field.

How can it be right that a player is fouled and then the team are penalised by playing with 10 men until the ref allows them back on the field???

Mind boggling.......

 

[PeteBlade]

Yes definitely, an utterly stupid rule that adds nothing to the game.

 

[CrookesBlade]

To be honest I think the rule is fair enough. If there is nothing to stop players doing it then it prolongs goal celebrations and encourages time wasting.

Appreciate that some players want to use the opportunity to display a tribute, but players wearing messages on shirts can open up a whole can of worms (politics, adverts, offensive messages) that on balance is probably best discouraged.

 

[wizadry]

It's only one of the ridiculous rules in place at the moment. The other main one being when a player who wins a free kick after being fouled, has to go off the pitch once treatment has finished on the field.

How can it be right that a player is fouled and then the team are penalised by playing with 10 men until the ref allows them back on the field???

Mind boggling.......

I think it was brought in to stop players feigning injury. It is daft at times when all they need to do is add the time on at the end.

 

[JohnDenver]

The ref would have been marked down by the assessors for not booking him. It's the authorities who need to sort themselves out.

 

[Russ]

I saw the clip recently of Billy do it for Donny after they lost their little one and the message read 'that's for you son' and never got booked rightly so. Common sense should have prevailed yesterday too

The match day referee (who was about 3 yards away) said he never saw it..

 

[Bladesway]

Yes definitely, an utterly stupid rule that adds nothing to the game.

Bit like Scadamore then?

 

[PeteBlade]

Bit like Scadamore then?

Replace 'rule' for 'twat' and I most definitely agree with you.

 

[Robby Blade]

It's a little known rule that you get a straight red for waving yer cock about in celibration.

I did while playing netball against Sheffield Girls.

 

[Bladesway]

Replace 'rule' for 'twat' and I most definitely agree with you.

There you have it.

 

[Harry's Game]

If you think the rule is stupid look up FIFA's rationalisation for it, it's priceless.

 

[WorkingtonBlade]

If you think the rule is stupid look up FIFA's rationalisation for it, it's priceless.

Unless you can point me towards it, I don't think FIFA have ever given an official explanation.

There have been various suggestions made by others, but none of them really stand up. I suspect the real reason is that sponsors became irritated that their name wasn't visible on the goal-scorer's shirt after he'd scored a goal (obviously a moment when the player is most likely to be photographed or on camera) and applied pressure on FIFA to put an end to it. FIFA prefer not to admit to that being the reason as it makes it look like the game is run by the sponsors - which, of course, is completely untrue.

 

[scouseblade]

Marcelo v Coventry. Took of his shirt, to reveal another Utd shirt underneath

Ref wasnt quite sure what to do. Dont think he got booked. Was hilarious. Obviously he wasnt too keen on the temperature that day!!

 

[Harry's Game]

Unless you can point me towards it, I don't think FIFA have ever given an official explanation.

There have been various suggestions made by others, but none of them really stand up. I suspect the real reason is that sponsors became irritated that their name wasn't visible on the goal-scorer's shirt after he'd scored a goal (obviously a moment when the player is most likely to be photographed or on camera) and applied pressure on FIFA to put an end to it. FIFA prefer not to admit to that being the reason as it makes it look like the game is run by the sponsors - which, of course, is completely untrue.

The reason they gave in an interview was that "games are shown on TV all over the world and in some religiously conservative cultures males bearing their torsos is offensive"

 

[shorehamview]

The reason they gave in an interview was that "games are shown on TV all over the world and in some religiously conservative cultures males bearing their torsos is offensive"

If other countries are upset by the scenes from a country different to their own when watching it on television then they are allowed to turn off the telly. Or if it's Americans that are upset by what they see, invade the country, bomb the shit out of it then nick their oil.

 

[HillmortonBlade]

At one point everyone seemed to start taking their shirt off when they scored, and started having more and more elaborate messages on their tops, then you had players with sponsor messages on their undershirts. Things like Ian Wright's Just Done It Nike t-shirt when he broke Arsenal's scoring record made sense, but was a blatant bit of advertising, some players started wearing multiple undershirts with different messages if they scored more than once, if they took off too many layers they had to sort all the shirts out again, or some threw their shirts into the crowd and had to go back to the bench to get a new one and it started causing ridiculous delays.

In general I don't think it should be a booking, but people taking ages to get re-dressed, putting political massages or adverts under their shirts is what ruined it for most people with a simple RIP or dedication to someone in their family underneath.

Or maybe players could get on with their jobs and do their dedications at the end of the match. Presumably they know the re (stupid or not) so they understand the consequence will likely be a booking. So when they do it, I don't understand the outrage that they get booked, they have obviously decided it was worth it.

 

[WorkingtonBlade]

The reason they gave in an interview was that "games are shown on TV all over the world and in some religiously conservative cultures males bearing their torsos is offensive"

Strange, then, that there are no rules about removing your shirt after the match (before leaving the field of play) - e.g. when swapping shirts with another player - or indeed at any other time during the match. Only in goal celebrations is it banned.

Also, removing your shirt when celebrating a goal is still worthy of a booking if you have another shirt underneath (as is usually the case these days). Surely if offending people was the genuine reason for the rule, it wouldn't apply if you removed one shirt to reveal another.

I think it's about sponsorship, and if FIFA have tried to use "people in religiously conservative cultures" as an excuse, that's pretty poor.

 

[Blade56]

Strange, then, that there are no rules about removing your shirt after the match (before leaving the field of play) - e.g. when swapping shirts with another player - or indeed at any other time during the match. Only in goal celebrations is it banned.

Also, removing your shirt when celebrating a goal is still worthy of a booking if you have another shirt underneath (as is usually the case these days). Surely if offending people was the genuine reason for the rule, it wouldn't apply if you removed one shirt to reveal another.

I think it's about sponsorship, and if FIFA have tried to use "people in religiously conservative cultures" as an excuse, that's pretty poor.

Does this help?

FIFA reinstated this rule in 2003 after originally relaxing it. There is no official reason for this rule and some of the reasons given don't really make sense.

Time wasting. Every (possible) decisive goal is celebrated in some way or other and the referee is responsible for adding time on so taking your shirt off really makes no difference at all.

Viewing discretion Some Muslim countries find it offensive to see bare chests. So what do they do at the end of the game when players regularly swap shirts. That one don't make much sense either.

Sponsorship You can't see the sponsors name when you take your shirt off. Really, how much exposure do they really want and since when did the sponsors run the game of football.

Possible political messages underneath the shirt. If that is the case, then book the player IF he has some political message underneath his shirt not everyone who takes their shirt off.

 

[WorkingtonBlade]

Does this help?

FIFA reinstated this rule in 2003 after originally relaxing it. There is no official reason for this rule and some of the reasons given don't really make sense.

Time wasting. Every (possible) decisive goal is celebrated in some way or other and the referee is responsible for adding time on so taking your shirt off really makes no difference at all.

Viewing discretion Some Muslim countries find it offensive to see bare chests. So what do they do at the end of the game when players regularly swap shirts. That one don't make much sense either.

Sponsorship You can't see the sponsors name when you take your shirt off. Really, how much exposure do they really want and since when did the sponsors run the game of football.

Possible political messages underneath the shirt. If that is the case, then book the player IF he has some political message underneath his shirt not everyone who takes their shirt off.

Well, kind of - but the writer's dismissal of the 'sponsorship' theory is a bit naive.

"How much exposure do they really want?" er....as much as possible - that's why they pay so much to put their names on the shirts.

"Since when did the sponsors run the game of football?" Well, I hate to break it to you, but...

 

[Hamburg Blade]

Whether the rule is stupid or not, I have to say, in all my years of playing football (amateur of course), rugby, squash, tennis, various other sports, all the goals I've scored, points I've won, matches I've won, I have never once felt the need to celebrate by getting undressed.

 

[TBW57]

It is a very stupid rule, but everyone knows it exists so the best way to avoid the punishment is not to take your shirt off. It shouldn't be too much to ask, really, should it?

 

[Treeton Blade]

Freeman gets booked for taking off his shirt to show some emotion at the death of his grandmother.
Celtic player got booked for simply putting his shirt over his head for just 3 seconds after scoring a goal in the OLd Firm match

How on earth are these types of things worth a booking especially compared to some cynical fould that get the same punishment !!
Its about time the rule makers changed this stupid rule

Yet you can celebrate in front of the opposition fans, and it`s not a booking.

Think the rule should be swapped round, celebrating with your own fans and getting a yellow is ridiculous.