Oh Dom

DJ said:
The new laws are more lenient, thankfully, so does he go down as a consequence of the touch by the ‘keeper? No, he’s going down because of the contact with the defender, who won the ball.

There’s no way I’d want that given against us.
Click to expand...
Belated

There is nothing in the rules about winning the ball that absolves a player from the consequences of the contact that happens afterwards. However, the ref has to adjudge if the tackler has been careless in the contact to give a pen. If he can't make the tackle without tripping Dom AND clearing it from his control, difficult not to give pen.

So if the ball had gone clear or to the goalie then probably all good, but if touching ball has very little effect and Dom still has sufficient control and the contact careless brings him down with help of goalie then can't be many complaints.

If you are saying Dom's only going down because that contact from the defender prevents him having a shot, that sounds like you've made the best argument on here for a penalty, and in fact a red card perhaps.

Amazingly nowhere do the rules define what's careless and what's reasonable. Who would be a ref when we expect everyone to interpret these grey lines the same to avoid inconsistencies.
 
ChampagneCherry said:
Belated

There is nothing in the rules about winning the ball that absolves a player from the consequences of the contact that happens afterwards. However, the ref has to adjudge if the tackler has been careless in the contact to give a pen. If he can't make the tackle without tripping Dom AND clearing it from his control, difficult not to give pen.

So if the ball had gone clear or to the goalie then probably all good, but if touching ball has very little effect and Dom still has sufficient control and the contact careless brings him down with help of goalie then can't be many complaints.

If you are saying Dom's only going down because that contact from the defender prevents him having a shot, that sounds like you've made the best argument on here for a penalty, and in fact a red card perhaps.

Amazingly nowhere do the rules define what's careless and what's reasonable. Who would be a ref when we expect everyone to interpret these grey lines the same to avoid inconsistencies.
Click to expand...

Its a contact sport, first and foremost.

At pace the defender wins the ball, either he touches Solanke or by kicking the ball, Solanke loses his footing or just at pace trying to adjust loses his balance. You can go through it frame by frame and not make a clear case that it’s 100% a penalty.

But even more importantly, live, in the stadium with your own eyes, it looked an excellent tackle and that is just as an important aspect of the game than any other bit of skill, pass, shot or save. So why not appreciate it, rather than lay blame on either Solanke for not scoring or the referee for giving a penalty?
 
DJ said:
Its a contact sport, first and foremost.

At pace the defender wins the ball, either he touches Solanke or by kicking the ball, Solanke loses his footing or just at pace trying to adjust loses his balance. You can go through it frame by frame and not make a clear case that it’s 100% a penalty.

But even more importantly, live, in the stadium with your own eyes, it looked an excellent tackle and that is just as an important aspect of the game than any other bit of skill, pass, shot or save. So why not appreciate it, rather than lay blame on either Solanke for not scoring or the referee for giving a penalty?
Click to expand...
Sorry, wasn't suggesting either, certainly not unhappy with ref's decision, definitely not unhappy with Dom.

It's just the case that also there couldn't be complaints had a pen be given. The argument for no pen just isn't that he won the ball. There is no concept of winning the ball that absolves him entirely from making contact with Dom, especially if that contact prevents a goal scoring opportunity.

A different ref might say he should have been able to win the ball cleanly with his right foot and using left foot was careless - most often referred to as tackling with the wrong foot. The reason for me it's not a pen based on that challenge though is he probably had a enough of an angle to have reasonable chance of winning it without contact so the contact is incidental because the striker should be expecting a fair challenge. It's our luck that on another day that's Steve Cook tackling with this right when the left is what is needed, and getting both a red card and penalty, that's how grey the line is on those challenges. Always will be.

I actually think it's important not to punish defenders for doing their job and making challenges where they can safely do so, so would concur that defender turned a difficult situation into an effective challenge which should be appreciated.

The ref is lucky Dom hasn't played for a pen by positioning his foot across to take that contact. That would have opened up a real can of worms given the rule changes.

In contrast, I don't think the same rules were applied to the penalty given on the day. Where I was sat, totally different angle to camera, the attacker had already overrun the pass and Rossi is the only one looking to play it as it arrives but their lad takes a clever position to make sure he gets caught. It's not a perfect game, that's why we love it, it's about the trials and tribulations of our lot Vs theirs.
 
Wasn't long ago a thread with this title would have been about everybody's favourite goblin/adviser, Mr D. Cummings : )
 
stevethepirate65 said:
‘Lucky’ is a bit strong. We were naïve in the second half but definitely didn’t deserve to lose. We had better chances to win than they did.
Click to expand...
Thanks Steve, Eddie used to say...but at least we made chances...and remember what he did. I accept you have a right to your opinion and I saw M'bappe miss a pen on tv not so long ago. The reason we didn't win that game was because their manager outwitted SP in the 2nd half.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;