China Football Association Super League shuffle event! ! !

On the positive side, the rules are followed. The so-called Fiona Fang cannot be without rules. Acting according to the rules is itself a kind of respect for the rules. Even if there are loopholes in the rules, as long as the rules can become rules, that is to say, they are still valid, and the existence of loopholes does not affect the effectiveness of the rules. The implementation of the rules, including the rational use of the loopholes in the rules, is noble in complying with the rules. And since the behavior conforms to the rules, there is no reason for others to blame. Whether there are loopholes in the rules themselves is not the subject of this debate. To say the least, any kind of rules can't be said to be absolutely perfect, all have loopholes, and they are constantly developed and perfected in the specific operation process, and in this process, as long as they conform to the provisions of the rules at that time, they are reasonable and legal.

In addition, it can be said that Shenhua is a team, and the purpose of participating in the league is to win the championship. If the rules allow, it is understandable to make rational use of the rules and create better conditions for winning the championship. You can give the example of 1998 Simone. At that time, David Beckham's kick to Simone was not heavy enough to make him fall to the ground, but Simone immediately fell to the ground, which led to David Beckham being sent off for intentional revenge. This is also a manifestation of the rational use of rules. This example can also be extended to other levels of society. I think we can even take Diego Diego Maradona's The Hand of God as an example. According to the rules, Diego Diego Maradona actually fouled, just taking advantage of the special circumstances that the referee didn't find. According to the rules of football match, the referee has the right to judge whether the goal is valid or not. Although there is no doubt about diego maradona's foul, the goal is valid when the referee makes a ruling that the goal is valid. In fact, this goal has always been regarded as a classic of Diego Maradona, and Ma Lao himself is also regarded as the "king of the ball". Diego maradona fouled so politely. Shenhua's behavior is within the scope of the rules. Why should Shenhua be scolded?

On the other hand, I think we should raise the issue of "passive enforcement" rules. The other party should admit that Shenhua's behavior conforms to and uses the rules, which must be admitted. However, it should also be pointed out that there are loopholes in this rule itself, which must be constantly made up and improved in practice. Regarding the competition system of the Super League, both the China Football Association and the club are parties and have the obligation to improve it through their own efforts, but Shenhua's behavior obviously does not belong to this situation. In addition, the social responsibility of the club can also be improved. The league is not only a competitive contest between teams, but also an important part of the league. When using the rules, the team should not only consider whether it is in line with its own competitive interests, but also whether it is worthy of the fans and whether it is in line with social fashion (similar sentences can be carefully considered and linked, which is very imposing and convincing). This is the social responsibility of the club. Shenhua did not shoulder this social responsibility and failed to fulfill it. At least, it has no obligation to improve the league system in a positive way. Instead, we only narrowly proceed from the competitive performance of the club and use the loopholes in the rules to "passively implement" the rules. This is far from what a responsible and responsible club should do.

In fact, the positive side is analyzed from the perspective of pure realism, and the negative side is discussed from the perspective of idealism. From different angles, both of them have invincible arguments. Never try to completely deny each other, it is absolutely a waste of time. It can be said that "we don't deny XXXXXXXXX, but we prefer XXXXXXXXX", which is a very common expression in the debate, not only appears comprehensive but not narrow, but also makes it easier to highlight one's own arguments.

Go back and think about it at night, and you can add some more:

From Shenhua's point of view, the rational use of rules for profit is not only its reasonable and legal right, but also a means it must master in the competition. As the saying goes, it is completely justified for Shenhua to make rational use of the rules for its own benefit. As for those who lashed out at Shenhua, maybe they just didn't understand the rules in time and "didn't use the rules well". Shenhua can't give up the right to make rational use of the rules just because other competitors don't.

In addition, Shenhua's move highlights the loopholes that may not be noticed in the league competition system, which is itself a way to improve the league competition system. If it is not Shenhua's move, perhaps such loopholes will exist for a long time. Of course, in this case, perhaps such a vulnerability will not obviously benefit or damage a team, but this cannot hide the fact that the vulnerability itself exists. Shenhua's move highlights this loophole so that management can face it squarely.

As far as Luneng is concerned, it can be admitted that Shenhua's move is to highlight the loopholes that may have been ignored (this may be two words, which should be highlighted), and to a certain extent, it has indeed played a role in improving the league competition system. But this is definitely not the best choice. Shenhua's action may conform to the rules, but it violates the principle of fair play and harms the interests of fans and other teams. Shenhua's practice of "perfecting the league system" is too costly. In fact, Shenhua can respond to the problems in the league system in a peaceful way through other better ways, such as communicating directly with the management, which not only solves the problems without paying such a high price, but also does not harm the interests of other clubs and fans. This is the best and most reasonable choice.

That's all I can think of. Come back with inspiration.