Roe Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 11 minutes ago, Three Lions said: Watched a clip of it and its a different sketch your seeing a lot from a still picture fella and its a foul. The foul is there in the picture you cant clout a leg whether your looking at it or not hes not clearing the ball hes clearing a shin. Not trying to be rude and disrespectful but your going end up having a law where its legal to kick a player and not the ball!! If you're applying that logic then no trip would be foul as it's the other player's fault for running into the leg 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Lions Posted April 1 Report Share Posted April 1 1 minute ago, Roe said: If you're applying that logic then no trip would be foul as it's the other player's fault for running into the leg its not a trip your saying its the same and with respect fella thats not how you ref you apply the laws to each different separate incident. if you watch the clip of Phillips and Gordon there is no trip!! The only contact is? Phillips smashing Gordon. Clear 100% foul you cant kick a players leg away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leveller Posted April 2 Author Report Share Posted April 2 On 01/04/2024 at 10:23, Three Lions said: its not a trip your saying its the same and with respect fella thats not how you ref you apply the laws to each different separate incident. if you watch the clip of Phillips and Gordon there is no trip!! The only contact is? Phillips smashing Gordon. Clear 100% foul you cant kick a players leg away. I’d be interested to see how you define it as “not a trip”. Sticking your leg between another players leg and the ball so that they kick your leg seems pretty much the definition of a trip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colemanballs Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 On 01/04/2024 at 16:23, Three Lions said: its not a trip your saying its the same and with respect fella thats not how you ref you apply the laws to each different separate incident. if you watch the clip of Phillips and Gordon there is no trip!! The only contact is? Phillips smashing Gordon. Clear 100% foul you cant kick a players leg away. The contact was initiated / caused by Gordon. Ergo, he is the one who should be penalised. If the laws provide otherwise, the laws lack any common sense. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hinsleburg Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 On 01/04/2024 at 10:23, Three Lions said: its not a trip your saying its the same and with respect fella thats not how you ref you apply the laws to each different separate incident. if you watch the clip of Phillips and Gordon there is no trip!! The only contact is? Phillips smashing Gordon. Clear 100% foul you cant kick a players leg away. At what point does it become obstruction out of interest? Gordon has made no attempt for the ball and has prevented Phillips from getting there? If Gordon had touched the ball then I agree 100% penalty, but the above logic doesn't work as a player about to cross/shoot in clear control of the ball kicks a player who's attempted a tackle (and missed the ball) would be seen as a foul by the attacker? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Three Lions Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 8 hours ago, Colemanballs said: The contact was initiated / caused by Gordon. Ergo, he is the one who should be penalised. If the laws provide otherwise, the laws lack any common sense. The contact was initiated. It doesnt matter. it immaterial here how Gordons leg got there under the lotg Phillips cant smack the players leg away from him there. its careless play and a penalty is the correct decision. 1 hour ago, hinsleburg said: At what point does it become obstruction out of interest? Gordon has made no attempt for the ball and has prevented Phillips from getting there? If Gordon had touched the ball then I agree 100% penalty, No pop the offence you would be looking at would be impeding. If Gordon has made no attempt to play the ball and that is subjective Phillips still cant give him a whack. The picture on here shows Gordon isnt in a position to block his opponent slow him down and hes a right to that position under the laws of the game. Both payers are in a playable distance of the ball and for impeding to be an offence one has to block the other or slow them down, one player has to be away from a playable distance and that cant happen when both players are there in that playable distance. You might say Gordons leg is in the way doesnt matter its in a legal position as per lotg close to the ball Phillips cant whack it and he does!! I rarely post this much so will be off till early next week if you have a ?? i will give it a go then. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 1 hour ago, Three Lions said: The contact was initiated. It doesnt matter. it immaterial here how Gordons leg got there under the lotg Phillips cant smack the players leg away from him there. its careless play and a penalty is the correct decision. No pop the offence you would be looking at would be impeding. If Gordon has made no attempt to play the ball and that is subjective Phillips still cant give him a whack. The picture on here shows Gordon isnt in a position to block his opponent slow him down and hes a right to that position under the laws of the game. Both payers are in a playable distance of the ball and for impeding to be an offence one has to block the other or slow them down, one player has to be away from a playable distance and that cant happen when both players are there in that playable distance. You might say Gordons leg is in the way doesnt matter its in a legal position as per lotg close to the ball Phillips cant whack it and he does!! I rarely post this much so will be off till early next week if you have a ?? i will give it a go then. Foul or no foul? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roe Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 2 minutes ago, Cowshed said: Foul or no foul? What? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 1 minute ago, Roe said: What? Is Hazard committing any fouls? I am going yes he is deliberately tripping (impeding) opponents. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roe Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 5 hours ago, Cowshed said: Is Hazard committing any fouls? I am going yes he is deliberately tripping (impeding) opponents. He quite clearly has possession of the ball in all of those clips. Not sure how that's a comparison to deliberately putting your foot in front of another player with the only intention of getting hit and then claiming a foul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Roe said: He quite clearly has possession of the ball in all of those clips. Not sure how that's a comparison to deliberately putting your foot in front of another player with the only intention of getting hit and then claiming a foul Hazard is being a Hazard. He is seeking to impede/trip an opponent/draw a foul. I think there is foul play on Hazards behalf, I don't know it is. I was enquiring if a ref can provide an answer. Edited April 3 by Cowshed 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.