FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Football Rule Query

Jump to newest
 

By *bi Haive OP   Man
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Cheeseville, Somerset

So.

Fox and I have just watched one of the dogs (the little one, not the big one) run around the garden with her full size football in her mouth - it's slightly deflated so easy for her to carry.

Which begs the question.

Is that allowed in professional football? I mean, it's not hand ball is it, they're allowed to use their heads.......so if someone had a fuck off massive gob (and plenty of footballers certainly seem to have those ) would they be allowed to bite tha ball, run the length of the pitch and literally spit it into the oppositions goal to score?

CBA to google the rule book so what do you folk think?

A

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ull English with teaMan
over a year ago

London

I think Louis Suarez might be the most valuable player in the world if that was the case….

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bi Haive OP   Man
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Cheeseville, Somerset


"I think Louis Suarez might be the most valuable player in the world if that was the case…."

A

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ir SupremacyMan
over a year ago

Bolton

Maybe with Louis Suarez on the wing and Hannibal Lector in midfield I would say yes x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ensuallover1000Man
over a year ago

Somewhere In The Ether…

I have always questioned something similar; say if a player were to perform ‘keepie uppies’ all the way down the pitch or alternatively, perhaps flip up the ball onto and between their shoulder blades (or balance it upon their heads) and waddle awkwardly down to the opposition’s goal - would it be legal?

I am told that it is a bookable offence (although would look rather awesome!)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *elix SightedMan
over a year ago

Cloud 8


"So.

Fox and I have just watched one of the dogs (the little one, not the big one) run around the garden with her full size football in her mouth - it's slightly deflated so easy for her to carry.

Which begs the question.

Is that allowed in professional football? I mean, it's not hand ball is it, they're allowed to use their heads.......so if someone had a fuck off massive gob (and plenty of footballers certainly seem to have those ) would they be allowed to bite tha ball, run the length of the pitch and literally spit it into the oppositions goal to score?

CBA to google the rule book so what do you folk think?

A

"

With a slight alteration I can see how this would be entirely possible. If you could trap the ball between chin and chest, you could still run with it. Not handball.

Good question, OP!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bi Haive OP   Man
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Cheeseville, Somerset


"So.

Fox and I have just watched one of the dogs (the little one, not the big one) run around the garden with her full size football in her mouth - it's slightly deflated so easy for her to carry.

Which begs the question.

Is that allowed in professional football? I mean, it's not hand ball is it, they're allowed to use their heads.......so if someone had a fuck off massive gob (and plenty of footballers certainly seem to have those ) would they be allowed to bite tha ball, run the length of the pitch and literally spit it into the oppositions goal to score?

CBA to google the rule book so what do you folk think?

A

With a slight alteration I can see how this would be entirely possible. If you could trap the ball between chin and chest, you could still run with it. Not handball.

Good question, OP!"

Exactly!

Could be a gamechanging loophole for sure.

Although if Cantona was still playing there'd be a few more of those flying karate kicks occurring if chin/chest carrying was allowed.....

A

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *elix SightedMan
over a year ago

Cloud 8

Come on you football experts out there! Other than maybe ‘poor sportsmanship’, is there a rule saying this can’t be done?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There is nothing in the rules that expressly prevents it, I was thinking obstruction but the ball would still be playable, but arguably only through dangerous play. The keepy uppy thing is probably fine, although the chances are you'll be cut in half after you did 3 or 4 as defenders don't take kindly to it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nightsoftheCoffeeTableCouple
over a year ago

Leeds

Can’t see there being a rule against it. But saying that the ref wouldn’t allow a partially flat ball in play and you’d never grip a fully pumped up one in your teeth. But you could rest it between your chin and chest and just run.

And if there was such a rule I guess it would fall along the same line as the travelling rule in basketball.

The mr

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ormerWelshcouple2020Man
over a year ago

Stourbridge

It’s classed as ungentlemently conduct.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

So dangerous play is defined as:

PLAYING IN A DANGEROUS MANNER

Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.

So holding the ball between your teeth could fall into this category as the player doing it could be susceptible to injury.

Be funny to see it though

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"I think Louis Suarez might be the most valuable player in the world if that was the case…."

Hey…”luis Suarez, your teeth are offside!” May still be one of the best chants in world football…

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ictoria_1976TV/TS
over a year ago

Newquay


"It’s classed as ungentlemently conduct. "

Looking at the behaviour of he current crop of footballers - If that rule was actually enforced not many would finish the game!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West


"I think Louis Suarez might be the most valuable player in the world if that was the case…."

^^^I came here to say this too

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West


"It’s classed as ungentlemently conduct. "

What about in the women's game?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *UGGYBEAR2015Man
over a year ago

BRIDPORT


"It’s classed as ungentlemently conduct.

What about in the women's game?"

That’s an interesting question.

It could be argued that it is still ungentlemanly conduct.

If you take the term to be a description of the behaviour not the person doing it.

If the behaviour was so named after the first person who behaved in that manor and it just happened to be a gentleman then it is forever more known as ungentlemanly.

It could be argued that the description of the behaviour is just as relevant to a woman as it is to a man who is not a gentleman as you could say before you can be accused of ungentlemanly behaviour you first have to be a gentleman which I wouldn’t describe most Premier league players as being.

Do you get what I’m getting at, or am I just rambling

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *7mutleyTV/TS
over a year ago

cambridge


"I have always questioned something similar; say if a player were to perform ‘keepie uppies’ all the way down the pitch or alternatively, perhaps flip up the ball onto and between their shoulder blades (or balance it upon their heads) and waddle awkwardly down to the opposition’s goal - would it be legal?

I am told that it is a bookable offence (although would look rather awesome!) "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *inky_couple2020Couple
over a year ago

North West


"It’s classed as ungentlemently conduct.

What about in the women's game?

That’s an interesting question.

It could be argued that it is still ungentlemanly conduct.

If you take the term to be a description of the behaviour not the person doing it.

If the behaviour was so named after the first person who behaved in that manor and it just happened to be a gentleman then it is forever more known as ungentlemanly.

It could be argued that the description of the behaviour is just as relevant to a woman as it is to a man who is not a gentleman as you could say before you can be accused of ungentlemanly behaviour you first have to be a gentleman which I wouldn’t describe most Premier league players as being.

Do you get what I’m getting at, or am I just rambling "

I'm on the halfway line, scratching my nuts and wondering wtf!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top