Match Day Thread Premier League, Cups & Euro Watch
- Thread starter LuisDiazgamechanger
- Start date
-
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
-
And I would be the one who would not have thought to run until you had said so
You must log in or register to see images
...
That was going to be me next point
Perfection in football is an impossibility
Apology accepted
Intentionally pedantic too
well I didn't want to outright say that so went for really.
One man's perfect is another man's 'that'll do'.Only if you have imperfect vision...
I saw that Everton were appealing the card so went and watched the video to see what the fuss was about. It's another incident that I'm surprised VAR got involved with. However, a player flying in, studs up, contact, is a caution. It's another one of those 'orange' offences. I don't think it will be overturned.So..........DCL's red.................3 match ban or the full 6?
Yeah,tend to agree.
Little actual force but his studs are high and over the ball.
- May 22, 2011
- 73,297
- 25,358
- 113
I was surprised by the uproar. Little contact but he went in with a straight leg? Studs showing a foot off the ground. The ball was in the floor so was absolute no need for his leg to be that high.
If the ball was bouncing and slides in like that sure, but can’t really have any complaints. Was dangerous and totally unnecessary and could have caused a lot more damage and was only luck that meant he didn’t fully connect with the guys leg
If the ball was bouncing and slides in like that sure, but can’t really have any complaints. Was dangerous and totally unnecessary and could have caused a lot more damage and was only luck that meant he didn’t fully connect with the guys leg
It's one of those "letter-of-the-law" things. Yes, technically, it could be a red card. In reality it's not normally given as a red card for something so lightweight.
They're not supposed to measure the offence by the outcome but by the action itself. In that regard it probably is a red. Again, it's about the consistency of the officiating because we've seen them both given and not given. Jota and Curtis come to mind on the given and Kane on the not given.
They're actually given a lot of leeway whether to enforce laws or not. Look at the 10 second holding of the ball by goalkeepers or the throw ins that move 20' down the sidelines from where they went out.. players brandishing imaginary yellow cards or arguing with refs.
All those things should receive action by letter of the law but referees overlook them. Usually.
- May 22, 2011
- 73,297
- 25,358
- 113
Goalkeepers holding the ball is one I wish they actually dealt with. I don’t think there is a thing in law books about it tbh. It used to be 6 second rule but think it’s just common sense now. But how often do see keeper catch it, fall on floor, lay on floor for 4/5 seconds, get up, walk around a bit… wave their arms forward to get everyone up. Walk around a bit more before kicking it.
It’s a pet peeve and I’ve counted keepers take 20-30 seconds from moment they catch the ball in some games (sad I know) but proper annoys me
According to IFAB it's still six seconds.
https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/#indirect-free-kick
The discretion appears to be, will refs make them follow the rule or not.