By n8 dogg Go To PostIf this game doesn’t finish 0-0 I’ll eat my hat.
By KP Go To PostThought wasn't allowed to be a pen and red for a professional foul anymore?Only if the foul is a genuine attempt for the ball
By JesalR Go To PostOnly if the foul is a genuine attempt for the ball
Hmmm seems very harsh that
i wonder if there is a single team in the PL who is satisfied with the VAR ref performances
like...look at it
like...look at it
Luiz's knee definitely touches Jose's heel. It's a light touch, but at speed both of them lose balance.
Whether that's a red and peno it's up to you lads.
Whether that's a red and peno it's up to you lads.
Knee moving forward, heel moving back to take the shot. Disrupts the play, both players lose balance.
pen + red only happens if the defender intentionally makes an attempt to take out the player
i guess both running in the same direction is a foul now
i guess both running in the same direction is a foul now
If I'd been a CB playing at the top level for over 10 years, I'd know full well that that kind of contact on an attackers heels from behind will precipitate in them going down.
He also didn't have to run behind his heels either.
He also didn't have to run behind his heels either.
By Xpike Go To Postpen + red only happens if the defender intentionally makes an attempt to take out the playerLiterally not the rule. If you foul someone with a clear goalscoring opportunity and make no attempt to get the ball, it's a red. This is an astonishing edge case, but it's a red
i guess both running in the same direction is a foul now
By JesalR Go To PostLiterally not the rule. If you foul someone with a clear goalscoring opportunity and make no attempt to get the ball, it's a red. This is an astonishing edge case, but it's a redhe didnt make an attempt at anything, the lad running just hit his leg as he was running
to be a red + pen the defender needs to make a clear attempt to stop the goal without getting playing the ball, luiz doesnt do anything but run back
By JesalR Go To PostLiterally not the rule. If you foul someone with a clear goalscoring opportunity and make no attempt to get the ball, it's a red. This is an astonishing edge case, but it's a red
But surely but using the no attempt to play the ball is saying full intent on fouling the player.
There is neither intent in this case.
By Xpike Go To Posthe didnt make an attempt at anything, the lad running just hit his leg as he was running
to be a red + pen the defender needs to make a clear attempt to stop the goal without getting playing the ball, luiz doesnt do anything but run back
Into the path of Jose's stride and heels. Which he knows he shouldn't do.
Jose should also get a yellow for a very bad dive as well.
By Xpike Go To Posthe didnt make an attempt at anything, the lad running just hit his leg as he was running
to be a red + pen the defender needs to make a clear attempt to stop the goal without getting playing the ball, luiz doesnt do anything but run back
By KP Go To PostBut surely but using the no attempt to play the ball is saying full intent on fouling the player.
There is neither intent in this case.
It was explained at half time, the rule makes no mention of intent to foul.
Denial of goal scoring opportunity (which this was) + no attempt to play the ball (which there wasn't) = a red card
Again, edge case, and the rule is clearly lacking here because I don't think it _should_ be a red, but it is.
By KP Go To PostBut surely but using the no attempt to play the ball is saying full intent on fouling the player.
There is neither intent in this case.
Intent rightly isn't part of the law here, which is why it's specifically phrased as "no attempt to play the ball".
