Rival watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
All this time I've been lonely
I know what you've been going through
I'll wait until my chances occur
'Cause you can't keep relying on Kepa

Don't you know I'll be your substitute
Whenever you need me
Don't you know I'll be your substitute
Whenever you want me
Don't you know I'll be your substitute
Whenever you need me
 
"Thanks for that Brian" said:
There's no chance that Real Madrid are facing the ignominy of finishing outside the top 3 in Spain...

You must log in or register to see media

Shameful.
Click to expand...
Thankfully we only have Mike Dean.
Next year we'll have VAR so when at the beginning of the season ''THEY'' decide who are going to be champions, THEY will notify VAR and all will be settled .
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee and Spurlock
Blue and White said:
Thankfully we only have Mike Dean.
Next year we'll have VAR so when at the beginning of the season ''THEY'' decide who are going to be champions, THEY will notify VAR and all will be settled .
Click to expand...

I agree. The continual awarding of clearly offside goals and ridiculous penalties to Liverpool defies any other explanation...why should VAR alter that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee and Spurlock
"Thanks for that Brian" said:
You must log in or register to see media

You think his leg don't look too clever,
You think that you should take off Kepa,

You can't substitute for another guy
You're called the boss, I don't know why,
Kepa's in charge, it ain't complicated,
Collect your P45 and get compensated,

Yeah........

SUBSTITUTE.... YOU CAN'T DO THAT,
SUBSTITUTE.....YOU'RE ****ED YOU TWAT,
SUBSTITUTE.....THERE'S NO MORE DOUBT,
SUBSTITUTE ....THEY WANT YOU OUT
Click to expand...
Brilliant <laugh>:emoticon-0137-clapp
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Changing Man and "Thanks for that Brian"
There's a good chance now that the real reason Chelski's player manager didn't go off is because he was only feigning cramp to waste time. Well that's ok then. What are the chances that the FA will then charge him for this cheating (let's call it what it is)? Anyone remember the regular "injuries" to Drogba? Chelski certainly have form for this kind of time wasting. If this is the case then all the pundits and journalists are (not for the first time) completely missing the point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee
"Thanks for that Brian" said:
I agree. The continual awarding of clearly offside goals and ridiculous penalties to Liverpool defies any other explanation...why should VAR alter that?
Click to expand...

No, no, no. You see I've been listening to the people who know, which are the unbiased pundits. According to them it's the fact that Pool bought a new keeper and (I'll go on strike if a bigger club comes in for me) central defender that have taken them to a "new level" (which is defined as "about 6 points more than Spurs").

It must be true because so many of them are saying exactly the same thing - you think there might be one who says something controversial (or as we like to call it "the truth") wouldn't you? Clearly buying those two players have made a big contribution, but let's summarise. The purchase of Allison and Van Dijk has resulted in Liverpool being given multiple offside goals (must be 10 or more by now!), penalties for Salah falling over that other players get yellow cards for and failure to award several penalties against Liverpool (and there are other things too). Yes, amazing how a keeper and a defender can do that!
 
vimhawk said:
There's a good chance now that the real reason Chelski's player manager didn't go off is because he was only feigning cramp to waste time. Well that's ok then. What are the chances that the FA will then charge him for this cheating (let's call it what it is)? Anyone remember the regular "injuries" to Drogba? Chelski certainly have form for this kind of time wasting. If this is the case then all the pundits and journalists are (not for the first time) completely missing the point.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't be the first time a Chav player feigning injury confused club staff, after all Eden Hazard feigning injury led to the club medical team treating him on the pitch - which in turn led to Alberto Steptonho losing his job and also getting bitchslapped by Eva Carneiro at an employment tribunal
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee
"Thanks for that Brian" said:
There's no chance that Real Madrid are facing the ignominy of finishing outside the top 3 in Spain...

You must log in or register to see media

Shameful.
Click to expand...
Under the wording of the current Laws that is a penalty. The defender takes a wild swipe at the ball and he gets nowhere near it while touching or barely missing the attacker. Contact is not required for it to be a foul. Merely that he acted 'without precaution'. I've said before that the Law is stupid but it is nevertheless the Law.

Interestingly the Laws explicitly cover the Chelsea issue yesterday and specifically say that if a substituted player refuses to leave the field then play continues!
 
PowerSpurs said:
Under the wording of the current Laws that is a penalty. The defender takes a wild swipe at the ball and he gets nowhere near it while touching or barely missing the attacker. Contact is not required for it to be a foul. Merely that he acted 'without precaution'. I've said before that the Law is stupid but it is nevertheless the Law.

Interestingly the Laws explicitly cover the Chelsea issue yesterday and specifically say that if a substituted player refuses to leave the field then play continues!
Click to expand...

You're right on the law but I'm not sure about the application. Casemiro is well behind the ball and the defender when he takes a dive with pike and twist. He's never in any danger of being kicked by the swinging foot, and it doesn't stop or inhibit him from challenging for the ball. He's not barely missed by the wild swipe and could never have been hit by it, unless he had a time machine.

Still no penalty for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee and humanbeingincroydon
"Thanks for that Brian" said:
You're right on the law but I'm not sure about the application. Casemiro is well behind the ball and the defender when he takes a dive with pike and twist. He's never in any danger of being kicked by the swinging foot, and it doesn't stop or inhibit him from challenging for the ball. He's not barely missed by the wild swipe and could never have been hit by it, unless he had a time machine.

Still no penalty for me.
Click to expand...

I think a wild swing of the foot after the ball has gone is a foul whether or not it makes contact. Possibly only dangerous play though. But if the ref thought it was a foul I don't think VaR is going to overrule it.
On whether it was a dive, the stupid way the current Laws are worded means if it was a foul it wasn't simulation as simulation only apply if you pretend to be fouled. Exaggerating your response is not an offence!
 
PowerSpurs said:
Under the wording of the current Laws that is a penalty. The defender takes a wild swipe at the ball and he gets nowhere near it while touching or barely missing the attacker. Contact is not required for it to be a foul. Merely that he acted 'without precaution'. I've said before that the Law is stupid but it is nevertheless the Law.

Interestingly the Laws explicitly cover the Chelsea issue yesterday and specifically say that if a substituted player refuses to leave the field then play continues!
Click to expand...
I am genuinely staggered by your view that the defender was "touching or barely missing" - there was easily a foot or more in it. It is plain and simple cheating and I cannot believe anyone buys that decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurlock and "Thanks for that Brian"
PowerSpurs said:
I think a wild swing of the foot after the ball has gone is a foul whether or not it makes contact. Possibly only dangerous play though. But if the ref thought it was a foul I don't think VaR is going to overrule it.
On whether it was a dive, the stupid way the current Laws are worded means if it was a foul it wasn't simulation as simulation only apply if you pretend to be fouled. Exaggerating your response is not an offence!
Click to expand...

I know that it doesn't specify it, but a wild swing of the foot surely has to be a danger to someone to be a foul? If a player lunges at a ball at head height, obviously out of control, to clear a lob off the line, when the nearest attacker is outside the box, even RM shouldn't get a penalty kick?

I'm reckoning that up the other end of the pitch, there's no offence here and that's the reality of the situation. In matches, other than where Madrid/Barcelona are under-performing, this results in no action for missed kick and swan dive.
 
I haven't seen the incident, but an attempt to kick an opponent is a foul.
Part of Law 12's definition includes:
  • kicks or attempts to kick
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
I haven't seen the incident, but an attempt to kick an opponent is a foul.
Part of Law 12's definition includes:
  • kicks or attempts to kick
Click to expand...
In this case, he didn't. Power's point was that he was reckless in kicking the ball, but I do not see that
You must log in or register to see media
 
SpursDisciple said:
In this case, he didn't. Power's point was that he was reckless in kicking the ball, but I do not see that
You must log in or register to see media
Click to expand...
That's a dive. The defender swings at the ball and Casemiro instigates contact with the back of his foot and Ashley Young's it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back