Denbury Red Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 I’ve just read on the BBC website that Harry Kane has said that ‘he felt a touch, so I went down’. i always thought a penalty was given when a player was fouled in the Penalty area - is Harry now saying just because he was ‘touched’ that was enough to claim he was fouled! if that’s the case there would be a penalty every time the ball went into the area!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickolas Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 Foul. GK did touch him so he was fouled. I reallydont know why Klopp is gettingso funny about both penalties. Both were. Both have been confirmed by all our ‘expert pundits’. its just odd a lino gave both when usually they do F all in a game regarding game changing decisions! shame this lino wasnt at bolton for the gbh on bobby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjiman_LFC Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 Dive of course, Lamela just as guilty. But maybe I'm bias. You go down because you have no choice not because you can. Had it gone the other way it would have felt like a tainted point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltshoveller Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 Dive If a player feels a touch and then THINKS im going down ITS A DIVE I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 The problem is now most pundits are agreeing that if a player feels a touch, they are entitled to go down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchred Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 Absolute 100% dive. We just don't like to admit it as it's a foreign thing not british Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 For me, the rule needs re-writing entirely. The question has to not simply be whether there was contact but whether that contact impeded the player's ability to either gain or maintain possession of the ball or to do what they intended to do with it. If not, it should not be a foul and it should not be a penalty. Furthermore, a player making the most of a challenge should be perceived as diving and awarded a yellow card, even if there was genuine contact and even if in some cases a penalty is also awarded for the offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheddarReds Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 14 minutes ago, Benjiman_LFC said: Dive of course, Lamela just as guilty. But maybe I'm bias. You go down because you have no choice not because you can. Had it gone the other way it would have felt like a tainted point. Lamela was clever, he put his body in the way so that Van Dijk could do nothing but foul him there. Kane, agreed it was soft, but if there is contact now there's always a chance it's given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 It does boil my piss when penalties get given for this sort of thing but the Bolton keeper`s assault on Bobby and Flinty getting the shirt nearly ripped off his back by two defenders don`t. I know, Cameron Jerome but it doesn`t make any of it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The turtle Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 If referees gave more penalties when a player stayed on his feet, there would be no need to go down. If staying on your feet = no penalty, then it is no surprise they ask the referee a question with contact!! By staying on your feet and being honest. Only the defending team gets an advantage, which your team mates would not thank you for!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 Keeper catches his foot, it was the foot he would land on to carry on running, Pen ! if it was his other foot and he then didn't try and carry on running , as plenty of players do, then I would say dive , but it wasn't . Lamela was kicked, may have made the most of it but he was kicked , so Pen. Another one was Benteke , shirt pulled so foul and Pen, Lawrenson was dubious but he's also a *****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 20 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said: For me, the rule needs re-writing entirely. The question has to not simply be whether there was contact but whether that contact impeded the player's ability to either gain or maintain possession of the ball or to do what they intended to do with it. If not, it should not be a foul and it should not be a penalty. Furthermore, a player making the most of a challenge should be perceived as diving and awarded a yellow card, even if there was genuine contact and even if in some cases a penalty is also awarded for the offence. This. ...and just in the opposite case, a player lunges in, and doesn’t get the ball, but rather than wait for contact that might injure you, you try to hurdle it, lose balance and fall over. That is not a dive, but should also be a foul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 46 minutes ago, nickolas said: Foul. GK did touch him so he was fouled. I reallydont know why Klopp is gettingso funny about both penalties. Both were. Both have been confirmed by all our ‘expert pundits’. its just odd a lino gave both when usually they do F all in a game regarding game changing decisions! shame this lino wasnt at bolton for the gbh on bobby! So why go down?, you said it was a foul, so why the need to embellish the offence?. 37 minutes ago, Enoch said: The problem is now most pundits are agreeing that if a player feels a touch, they are entitled to go down. That is because they have to protect their portion of the gravy train, the paymasters (mainly Sky) would never allow honesty on this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 41 minutes ago, Benjiman_LFC said: Dive of course, Lamela just as guilty. But maybe I'm bias. You go down because you have no choice not because you can. Had it gone the other way it would have felt like a tainted point. This all comes back to the basic argument as got whether football is a contact sport. All over the pitch the slightest contact when players comes together usually results in one of them going down poleaxed and usually clutching some part of their anatomy in agony ( usually a part of the body nowhere near the pin to contact - if there was one). Ive said before that it now seems to me that virtually all tackles result in free kicks, and some pretty innocuous ones result in yellow cards. In the penalty area strikers make things worse because of their propensity to "go down" under the slightest touch. On top of this is the punditry, whereby the first thing they discuss at the end of the game is the contentious issues, and primary of those will be penalty decisions - should it have been or not - which is examined and analysed from every conceivable angle and direction. Perversely, as illustrated in most of the Palace game on Saturday, all in wrestling seems to be completely acceptable in a penalty area at corners and free kicks. However, when one is penalised, correctly, and a penalty awarded, Alan " he was entitled to go down"Shearer, tweeted that we can expect 20 decisions a game if that was a penalty. If, as Shearer is suggesting, holding/pulling a player's shirt is acceptable and allowed, then the Lamella penalty should never have been given. Listening to a bit of talksport earlier today on caller said the introduction of VAR ( which many advocate to deal with such decisions) would remove what makes football such a great game, and that is the debating points it creates, including those around penalty decisions. Another caller talked about Deli Alli's booking for diving, and suggested that he is now getting a reputation that will influence refs to not give decisions for Spurs when Alli goes over in the penalty area in future. There is still much of the game that make it as attractive and addictive as it was when I was growing up. However the increasing desire to smooth off every rough edge, remove any uncertainty and treat powder puff, overpaid prima donna's with kid gloves ( would John Atyeo , Dickie Rooks or Gerry Gow have worn gloves during a game?) will see our great game go the same way as the NFL in the way it is packaged, marketed and presented. Having said that you certainly can;t accuse NFL players of "feeling contact so they were entitled to go down", although plenty of them wear gloves in when playing indoors! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swanker Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 All depends on the ref. Bobby Reed nearly got knocked out on Friday and got a free kick given against him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Goch Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 100% dive. If the lad wasn’t England’s golden boy then he’d be hounded out by all the pundits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltshoveller Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 Thinking of going watch Bristol Flyers Basketball is also a non contact sport Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRISTOL86 Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 Until referees start awarding penalties when a foul has occurred - and an honest player who can stay on their feet, does stay on their feet - it’ll keep happening. I don’t like it but I can also understand it to a degree. The offence hasn’t changed, yet the player knows that one scenario will result in the foul correctly being awarded and one won’t. You shouldn’t need to fall over for a foul to be correctly identified as a foul but in the majority of cases it seems you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Enoch said: The problem is now most pundits are agreeing that if a player feels a touch, they are entitled to go down. Gary Neville is the worst for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 1 hour ago, nickolas said: Foul. GK did touch him so he was fouled. I reallydont know why Klopp is gettingso funny about both penalties. Both were. Both have been confirmed by all our ‘expert pundits’. its just odd a lino gave both when usually they do F all in a game regarding game changing decisions! shame this lino wasnt at bolton for the gbh on bobby! You'll have to point out the bit in the rules that says contact is illegal. I've not come across it in 38 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Benjiman_LFC said: Dive of course, Lamela just as guilty. But maybe I'm bias. You go down because you have no choice not because you can. Had it gone the other way it would have felt like a tainted point. I don't understand why you need to go down. Contact isn't illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 100% dive. Every player should be making every effort to stay on their feet at all times and carry on. Any little bit less is cheating. I hope he's punished retrospectively but I suspect he won't be. I still think the only way to stop this will be to put massive retrospective bans on it. It's a shame Alli got booked rather than punished retrospectively, his embarrassing dive was worth a good five game ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shelts Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 Minor touch . He feels it and falls . In this day n age it’s a pen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 And Deulofeu dives again tonight for Watford in a match where they've already benefited from the softest second yellow you'll ever see. Mind you any side with Hazard and Fabregas in deserves it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrick's Marvels Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 Thanks for confirming it, Kane - football's now a non-contact sport. The game has, indeed, gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 2 hours ago, Enoch said: The problem is now most pundits are agreeing that if a player feels a touch, they are entitled to go down. I bet Jimmy Armfield didn't agree , because he played in an era when physical contact was an accepted part of the game and "a touch" did not result in a player in a heap, a foul and often a booking. Most of today's pundits played during a period when I am certain that they were/are coached how to react to physical contact challenges, in order to gain the best advantage for the team. Not saying that British players are immune for accusations of simulation, but I also think the influx of foreign players in the last 15 years ha helped take simulation to a new level. For some time Ive felt that we are too nice as a team in this respect, that we have players who rarely go down without cause or simulate, but would not have it any other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickolas Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 36 minutes ago, 054123 said: You'll have to point out the bit in the rules that says contact is illegal. I've not come across it in 38 years. Who said it was?! just pointing out these were fouls. I cant see why anyone bar the most insane ( delusional ) liverpool fan could see otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 6 minutes ago, nickolas said: Who said it was?! just pointing out these were fouls. I cant see why anyone bar the most insane ( delusional ) liverpool fan could see otherwise. You did, above. "GK did touch him so he was fouled." Not true. Contact does not mean there is a foul. Going down when you could carry on is cheating, which is what happened here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickolas Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 His next leg down in his step pattern is the one touched by the awful liverpool gk, taking him off balance. just as per aden flints ‘touch’ on matt smith last week when smith was shooting. Very minimal but a foul. Its all opinions and mine is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 5, 2018 Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, nickolas said: His next leg down in his step pattern is the one touched by the awful liverpool gk, taking him off balance. just as per aden flints ‘touch’ on matt smith last week when smith was shooting. Very minimal but a foul. Its all opinions and mine is correct. He chose to go down, and when a player does that they are cheating and should be banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.