There already is. If an outfield player wins the ball cleanly, but takes an opponent out with his follow through, it is a foul and sometimes a booking. If a keeper dives at a players feet, wins the ball cleanly, but then takes the opponent out, with his follow through, no foul is given. That is clearly one rule for outfielders that isn't applied to the goal keeper- double standards.
Don't be so pedantic and that's not a rule as written in the laws. That's down to the referees judgement.
"it was the performance of referee Lee Mason that caught my attention. It has been a long time since I have seen such incompetence from a referee. Not to award Southampton a penalty for Jack Butland's tackle on Dusan Tadic was bad enough but sending off Sadio Mane for his perfectly acceptable challenge on Erik Pieters was a shocking verdict by any standards. Granted, we all make mistakes, but errors of this nature and at this level are totally unacceptable." - Garth Crooks
Well I think I can settle this. I have watched the incident with Dusan over and over. He definitely deserved a penalty. Personally, I reckon a weeks wages and having to wear a Pompey shirt during training this week would seem equitable.
I think you have to be more charitable with goalkeepers because the very nature of their job means they are more open to fouling an attacking player....I don't mean there is a difference in the laws, just a difference in how refs see it. If a GK brings down a player when he has no hope of getting a ball....red card, but I suspect most refs are kinder when the GK may have tried to get the ball...especially as he is usually putting his arms and head into the situation rather than sliding legs and feet. Do we really want to see GK hesitate all the time because a red card becomes too common.
Agreed. Nothing worse than a keeper getting sent off early on for just trying to make a save & maybe mistiming by a couple centimeters. It can be the harshest rule, & a real game changer.
My Grandad always used to say that in obvious cases such as handball on the line or fouling a player with an open goal then the ref should be allowed to just award the goal. Not saying I agree mind, but just thought I'd throw it out there
Which is basically what I was trying to say in my first post, I did say it was a minefield trying to interpret what the rule meant, but it was the fact that he had a decision to make which he didn't fancy, made him chose a kop out,
He could have given a penalty for a foul in the area without a red card...on the basis that it wasn't a clear cut opportunity. Ball was going away from goal....and it was Tadic after all No one, apart from a few moany Saints fans, would have argued with a pen and a yellow card.
One thing that I always try to keep in mind (unless the laws have changed since I used to referee) is that for a foul to be a foul it has to be deliberate. Therefore, strictly, someone showing 'misjudgement' should not be penalised at all. Clearly though if a goalkeeper brings down a forward going round him a penalty should follow (regardless of the laws?) but maybe a sending off is harsh unless the referee can be 100% certain that it was a deliberate act. The same thing applies to handballs. Not so long ago a ball only had to touch a hand or an arm for it to be given as a free kick. Now, thankfully, refs are a little more lenient. However we still have this crazy notion of an 'unnatural position' which has come to mean arms away from the body. 9 times out of 10 its the arms held stiff to the side of the body that are actually in the unnatural position. To show how hard it is to deliberately handle a ball shot at you from close range just look at Stoke's goal. Despite the fact that Forster was a couple of yards away from the shot all he could do was to wave an arm in the general direction of the ball. No-one can react that fast. Just watch the sport of handball for another example. The goalkeepers there just do star jumps as they cannot anticipate where the ball is going. So, most penalties for handball probably shouldn't be awarded and as such the player should not be sent off.
A bit slow on the uptake and it may have been mentioned, but wasn't Mike Jones pencilled in originally to Officiate in this game?
I can't remember the last act of sexism I saw on the pitch so I'm more worried about diving. Diving is seriously annoying and we have got to the point where most players now 'dive' even if they are genuinely fouled and would have gone over anyway. Perhaps it is better to say that they accentuate the fall. The problem is that it has now got so ordinary that when a player makes a genuine attempt to stay on his feet, referees will rarely give a foul thereby making the players do it more. Tadic was fouled and it should have been a penalty but he dived as well (i.e. he exaggerated the fall to make it more spectacular).
The Tadic penalty wasn't even a claw goal scoring opportunity. It probably wasn't even close to one. If Butland hadn't brought him down, Dusan would have gone round him, controlled it with his left foot, looked to see who was available for the assist, switched it to his right foot, thought "Now where did we saying we were going for dinner tonight?" Put it back in his left foot, done a couple of keepy-ups and then let the defenders knock it out for a throw. #love Susan really.
Fouls don't have to be deliberate for me. If someone trips someone, it's a foul regardless of whether it's deliberate or not.
