But if a kick makes you lose control of the ball then a slight pull puts you on your backside then it’s a free kick, pen in the box
That's the crux of it. Did that kick make Amad lose control of the ball and/or fall over? It's a no for me
Same here, definite red which would never had happened had Stroud or his assistant had eyes. To me it’s all an about the context of the game and how it is reffed. Throughout the game, that type of foul on Amad was given as a free kick elsewhere on the pitch. As a matter of fact, that foul on Amed and the one on Stewart seconds before their second goal were one of the few not given. I can’t recall a time, they appealed for a free kick that they never got. But I was just too engrossed in what a useless **** Stroud was The foul on Stewart, he looked directly over to his linesman, I’d like to think he was hoping it was offside to save the twat making a call. Cos if he can’t see that from the angle he is, again bearing in mind the soft fouls he gave throughout, then he shouldn’t be in the middle of the pitch
For a referee to be consistent he has to give what he believes fouls to both sides. Stroud was far from consistent and you know what? That is all we can ask for. I cant make his mind up what’s a foul and what isn’t. But once you start giving soft ones, you have to keep giving soft ones otherwise you risk being labelled a useless ****. Keith Stroud was clearly the latter If you give a soft foul when a defender falls over after the slightest contact, then you have to do the same when in the opposition box. It’s too easy for these ****s to give free kicks in the middle of the park, but the spineless ****ers bottle it when the same foul happens in the box. I was just calming down, then Mitrovic fell over taking a penalty and giving away a free kick. You couldn’t write it, the spakey ****ing bastards
But did the defender pull his shirt at the same time... The extended highlights show it from the other angle seem to indicate that he did
I don't know why (well maybe I do) but innocuous fouls in the box just don't feel like penalties when they would be given as a free kick anywhere else in the box. Maybe it's the finality of what giving a foul in the box leads to, but there is something about fouls in the box that have to be absolutely stonewall.
That's not stated in the rules. The rules state "a direct free kick if the player kicks or attempts to kick"
It's a shocking mess. Inconsistent and has nowhere near the tech to do the job they claim it can. It is neutering refs, and causing seemingly on the hoof rule changes. It also seems to " help" certain clubs! Good for two things I'd say. Telling if a foul was committed inside or outside of the box, and if a serious foul , (red card level), was missed by the ref. Far too much opinion in the rest, no more worthwhile than the ref on the pitch. It takes ages, and they go too far back to check, or at least sometimes they do, you never know. Worse still, it takes the best moment of the game from the paying spectators; the mad, elemental moment of a goal. It's a half or three quarter moment now. The thing is ruined for people there. And of course the supporters at the ground know the least, and they know it the latest I don't think I could go and watch us in a VAR game. They've taken it away IMO.
Agree, but they need to improve the language on that, as that law is usually applied when the ball isn't there, and a player just kicks out for no reason. In the one yesterday its more a question of if the ref thinks the player was impeded. If not, then its just contact and play on as Top Cat points out. For what it's worth I think he was impeded and should have been a pen. A very soft one, but still a pen.
