Match Day Thread Manchester United v Swansea City

Agreed, but Rashford did attempt (and succeed) to avoid contact.
I think where people are going wrong is listening to the sound bites of so called experts and ex-pros, no contact is immediately a dive. Well in real life that is just not true, how many times have you seen a fall called a dive yet the player involved never asked for a foul, people whinge about players faking injury when there is no contact, have they watched the way they land?
I am a little sick of people calling "dive" every time a player hits the floor because 16 cameras in slow-mo shows no contact, watch a players reaction and make your own judgements.

 

We are going to have to agree to differ on the contact issue with Rashford I think. I saw no arm in the way and no attempt to avoid contact with something that wasn't there. You are maintaining there was a barrier, i.e. the keeper's arm.

What people seem to forget is that football is a sport and therefore the rules of sportsmanship should apply. I will reverse the dive claims by asking you how many players who have not begged for a penalty in those situations, then got one but told the Ref it was neither a dive nor was it a penalty? If the Ref gives it they take it gratefully and that is cheating. I accept that if some contact is made at speed then it can throw a player off balance and cause a fall. Falling when there is no contact for me says they anticipated the touch and went down anyway despite the fact the touch never came. That's where they look stupid even if they show no embarrassment as don't their managers. What kind of message does that send out? I see kids doing it on the park in a kick about these days. They start at a very early age and it's sad.

 

I can accept that as a valid point

Are you as reasonable with your own players when they go down

 

Hope these Welsh sheep shaggers go down. The crying from them on this thread has been embarrassing.

 

Sensible is ok

 

Diego

That was never a penalty in a million years ffs.

Can't believe there is someone actually defending it

 

It's a funny one imo. Definitely not enough for a penalty, but hard to argue it wasn't a foul.

After all, if a player makes a slide tackle at another player, making no contact but preventing them from playing the ball, it would be a free kick. So why should a keeper be allowed to throw themselves at the feet of an attacker, forcing them to get out of the way or risk a broken ankle, and get away scot free?

Personally I think there should be more scope for an indirect free kick to be given in cases of obstruction in the box. Saves the ref having to make a penalty decision when it's not clear, and makes a player much less likely to go to ground if they think all they will get is an indirect free kick in a packed box, rather than a full penalty.

 

I think if he just runs and takes the foul then it's the stupidity of the goalkeeper at fault. He starts going down (diving) well before the keeper touches him which is what I don't like.

 

You know you've named yourself after a Welshman on here?

 

This is real sitting on the fence. Just hope that backside doesn't hurt too much from the splints

First you say that anywhere else, it would be a foul. So a foul in a penalty area, is a pen, yes?

Also I don't have much time for these sanctimonious whinging Welsh and ABUs who say that this is blatant cheating. The reality is that 9 players out of ten would have gone down with the GK coming out towards them at full speed.

 

True, but that assumes he knows the keeper is going to pull out of the challenge. If he carries on running to take the foul and the keeper doesn't pull out it could be a nasty injury.

 

My view on the penalty, was that it was definitely not a penalty, and that Rashford was looking for it. But then again 95% of strikers would have reacted the way Rashford did to the challenge, as Micheal Owen said at half time your eyes light up as a striker when you see a keeper dive in like that.

Nowadays as a striker if there is contact but you stay on your feet you don't get a penalty even though you are fouled, so Rashford has assumed the keeper is going to make contact and foul him, so he's obviously wanted to make sure he gets the penalty when he's fouled.

Unfortunately in this situation the keeper has changed his mind in mid challenge and pulled back, so what was looking like an inevitable foul from Rashfords point of view is all of a sudden not one, but Rashford was already on his way down anticipating it. It's kind of like if someone punched you in the face but stops an inch from your eye, your not just going to stand completely still and not anticipate that punch coming, its an instinctive reaction to react in some way.

Let's just say for arguments sake that Rashford didn't react to the goalkeeper challenging him, and there was contact, but it wasn't enough contact to bring Rashford down. It would still be a foul but the referee wouldn't give it because the player has stayed on his feet. Rashfords team mates and manager would all be questioning why hes stayed on his feet. So as a striker you are kind of in a no win situation, you are either a diver to the media or youre going to be unpopular with your team mates and manager.

I know it's tough to take when you are on the receiving end of a bad decision like that, but let's not kid ourselves that a Swansea player if in Rashfords position wouldn't react the same, and would then tell the referee afterwards that it wasn't a penalty.

Points are so important for clubs and managers, that there is no way a player is going to talk the referee out of giving them a penalty that was wrongly awarded. No Swansea player would do it if in the same position, especially in the position you are in.

 

If that's true then 9/10 are cheating in that situation. The ABU thing got old a long time ago. I don't think 9/10 would go down before being touched.

 

I don't really see how tbh. Just play the ball- if you get fouled you get fouled.

 

At least read what I say before replying Christian. Or better still read the rules:

"An indirect free kick is awarded if a player:

• impedes the progress of an opponent without any contact being made"

Ergo it should have been an indirect free kick to Utd. As it would have been anywhere else on the pitch. I'm just unsure why none of the pundits and former refs commenting on it don't appear to have read the rules first. Or for that matter whey the FA don't consult the rules before instructing the refs each season.

 

Where the ball was he would have to plant his foot in order to attempt to control it and cross the ball or round the keeper. No striker will plant their foot in front of a diving goalkeeper, unless they have a death wish.

And ultimately plenty of keepers know this now, so will make a wild dive like Fabianski did, knowing that will cause the player to jump out of the way, then pull their hands back at the last minute and plead innocence. Imo that is as bad a tactic as diving for a penalty, particularly as you will often see a ref book a player who jumps out of the way and then goes to ground.

 

Goalkeepers like fabianski rush off to put the attacker off and try to get an advantage by threatening to clobber the player. And the player is supposed to just carry on no matter what and take a full body whack if the contact is made.

Sane went against the players leg and fell. Yet it is less of a penalty than Rashford's.

 

Yes! That is exactly what the player should do. Until they bring in a rule that goalkeepers can't run from their line towards an opponent, just don't throw yourself over for no reason.

 

It was not running towards an opponent, it was rushing and sliding towards the players feet. He pulled his hands away at the last moment. The referee couldn't see it but that's the risk the GK knew he was taking.

We could argue the point until the cows come home but every fan knows that they will take it if it were their team.

 

That's not really the point, is it? Obviously fans want their team to get a penalty. The argument is, without looking through a United (or anti-United) lens, should that be considered a dive? Fabianski pulled out of a tackle like a defender can. What right that gives for Rashford to fall over I don't know.