Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Weekend Games
Topic Started: Feb 1 2014, 09:19 AM (1,980 Views)
dsch15
Member Avatar

phatosas
Feb 4 2014, 12:54 PM
dsch15
Feb 4 2014, 11:40 AM
phatosas
Feb 4 2014, 02:51 AM
dsch15
Feb 3 2014, 04:52 PM
chillyheat
Feb 3 2014, 04:50 PM
dsch15
Feb 3 2014, 04:48 PM
chillyheat
Feb 3 2014, 04:46 PM
phatosas
Feb 3 2014, 04:45 PM
That was a red card in my opinion
big time.
Textbook yellow for a tactical foul. Too far from goal to be an obvious scoring opportunity.
not sure but i thot he was last man. if he was then it should b pure red.
"Last man" (i.e., the number of defenders) is only part of the equation. There are at least three other factors the referee is required to consider:

- Distance from the ball
- Direction of the player
- Distance from the goal

That play had three out of the four, hence yellow and not red.
A week ago Rose makes a genuine play for the ball and gets sent off because they think it was a mistimed tackle that stopped a goal scoring chance (that tackle has since be deemed as a good tackle). On the other hand a player makes a cynical play to stop a 1:1 potentially developing in that situation and he gets a yellow, it makes no sense. Dogso is supposed to stop cynicism, not stop players that happen to make unfortunate tackles or punish incidental handballs on the goal line.

By the way what is the difference between this and the Aterta red card? I actually think this was a better situation considering this was a better situation because it was very central and Oscar was behind him, not side by side.
Setting aside for the moment Rose may not actually have committed a foul (that's referee error, not an inconsistency in the Laws), the current approach makes very good sense to me.

Speaking generally, yellow cards are meant to discourage cynicism. In the current context, red cards are for a quite different purpose - i.e., to punish fouls that deny an attacker an obvious goal scoring opportunity. That certainly has the attendant effect of limiting the number of cynical challenges, but do you really want to open up the can of worms that requires a referee to divine the intentions of the player? Does it matter to the victim? Not at all. The only thing that matters is that foul play has denied him a chance at a good shot.

Foul play. There's a reason we call it that. The notion that there is such a thing as an "honest" foul has gained far too much acceptance for my liking. I don't want referees letting defenders off the hook simply because they were able to make a bad challenge look like a nice try.

As far as the Arteta example goes, that seemed to me an unnecessarily strict interpretation of the Law, as would Dean's have been if he sent City's defender off yesterday.

In unrelated news (now that I've got a real head of steam up)...
Here's what I think about players brandishing imaginary cards - Give them the one they're asking for! And here's what I think about managers (a la Mourinho yesterday) running up and down the touchline asking for opponents to be sent off - Send them to the stands (preferably way up high among the opponents' supporters)!
If that same thing happened in the NBA, it would be a clear path to the basket. I dont think the distance from the goal should matter, what should matter is if there is another player behind the ball that could prevent it from developing into a goal scoring opportunity. In this case, the defender was the last man, the ball was finely placed and there was no other City player that could interfere with the play. If the defender didnt commit the foul, that play was going to develop into a scoring opportunity. I am glad you acknowledge that this is no different from the Arterta incidence.

As for players brandishing imaginary cards, I was watching videos on youtube and I stumbled upon Mike Riley performance in the game that ended our unbeaten run and I was amazed by how bad Riley was but also how meek our players were in making our case to the referee. I also watched Gary Neville analyze the goal that Newcastle had disallowed in the City game and it was obvious that the referee and linesmen were influenced by the City players to disallow the goal. I think referees are human and can be influenced. The brandishing of imaginary card is a bit irritating but players would find other ways to get their message to the referee if they ban the brandishing of imaginary cards.
Yeah, I'm going to have to wait until after the revolution to institute my proposal for punishing imaginary card wavers.

As for this: "I dont think the distance from the goal should matter", I can only suggest you petition FIFA (and/or IFAB) for a reinterpretation. Under the current regime the referee is required to consider distance from the goal, and all four criteria (distance to goal, distance to ball, direction, and number of defenders) must be met in order to send off the offending player.
Edited by dsch15, Feb 4 2014, 01:50 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
santry_gooner
Member Avatar

dream_team
Feb 3 2014, 08:06 PM
jays712
Feb 3 2014, 06:37 PM
santry_gooner
Feb 3 2014, 06:02 PM
This was an enthralling game for a low scoring game with a lot of defensive tactics.

First of all has man city's midfield got any plan B? Mourinho (while I can't stand the man) has sent out an instruction video on how to stop them. Yaya Touré takes no responsibility in defending (mark down for future discussion on why Busquets is a more complete player). They did lack Fernandinho, but if you are managing a squad you have to expect to be without big name players. As it turn out he is their talisman. And when you bypass city's midfield you are faced by one strong defender and three nervous guys who panic when he occasionally gets caught out of position.

Looking at the game Chelsea might have won 0-3 but they were so focused on their plan to first flood and then isolate Touré and Dimichaelis with Luiz and Matic that it hardly mattered. Hazard looked great tonight at he collected the possession of the man city rubble again and again. The poor city defenders almost deserve sympathy as they faced breaks again and again.
Yaya can provide more on offense than Busquets, while Busquets can provide more in a defensive role. It seems like Yaya has taken a step backwards defensively the last couple of seasons. I don't even remember him coming this much forward, pretty much abandoning any defensive role at all.
I think it is the way pellegrini plays, Yaya was more defensive under Mancini, and the only time he was allowed to join the attack, is when Mancini plays 2 CM behind Yaya, making Yaya a CAM. oh and santry Yaya is a more complete player than busquetts who offers NOTHING in attack.
B-)

Yeah sure. Busquets isn't just a defensive midfielder. When you see Barca doing their tiki-taka he's a massive part of that. That's why I say he's a more complete player. He covers ground, not only to stop opponents but to keep Barca movements alive! recycle the ball and switch the direction of attack.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jays712
Member Avatar

santry_gooner
Feb 4 2014, 04:36 PM
Yeah sure. Busquets isn't just a defensive midfielder. When you see Barca doing their tiki-taka he's a massive part of that. That's why I say he's a more complete player. He covers ground, not only to stop opponents but to keep Barca movements alive! recycle the ball and switch the direction of attack.
Busquets is a more physical version of Arteta in the way he plays for us, except he comes forward a lot less than Arteta (who doesn't do it much either anymore). When I say he doesn't provide what Yaya does offensively, I'm talking about those surging runs that Yaya does along with the ability to put the ball in the net. Yaya has scored as much this season than Busquets has in his entire career. It's also a career high in goals for a season for Yaya already, which again shows that he's spending more time than ever attacking while dropping any semblance of playing defense like he used to. At this point, they don't even play a similar style to each other.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply