That **** on talksport

You're allowed to shield the ball as it goes out or at the corner flag. Realistically you're not going to be able to tackle from behind until the player and ball are stationary.
Unless you can convince FIFA that shielding the ball is unsporting behaviour it will inevitably end up with fouls like that and obviously, players exaggerate it because attempting to ride it demonstrably reduces your chances of gaining a free-kick.

My pet hate is striker one on one with the 'keeper. The 'keeper goes down to smother the ball, the striker kicks the ball away with the outside of the boot, runs into the 'keeper and wins a pen.
 
Kudos said:
You're allowed to shield the ball as it goes out or at the corner flag. Realistically you're not going to be able to tackle from behind until the player and ball are stationary.
Unless you can convince FIFA that shielding the ball is unsporting behaviour it will inevitably end up with fouls like that and obviously, players exaggerate it because attempting to ride it demonstrably reduces your chances of gaining a free-kick.

My pet hate is striker one on one with the 'keeper. The 'keeper goes down to smother the ball, the striker kicks the ball away with the outside of the boot, runs into the 'keeper and wins a pen.
Click to expand...

The shielding of the ball is one of my pet hates in football. I personally think it’s obstruction.
 
afcdibby said:
The shielding of the ball is one of my pet hates in football. I personally think it’s obstruction.
Click to expand...


Agreed.

I remember a game, years ago, at home to (I think) Plymouth Argyle. They were winning, and keeping the ball in the corner in the last few minutes. Mark Nightingale was obviously fed up with this, and promptly kicked one of the players about 6 foot in the air.
He was sent off, but after all these years it is the only thing I remember about this game.
 
Red Sky said:
That one was a 2 handed shove. We've had opposition players go down before when someone puts out an arm out to stop them colliding, or rests an arm on their back while they are jockeying for position.

Pretty sure you have to have a plate of chips on both shoulders to not to see that as a foul.
Click to expand...

I absolutely do not think its a foul at all. Any time a player deliberately invites contact then goes down equally as deliberately should not be given as a foul.

Kudos said:
You're allowed to shield the ball as it goes out or at the corner flag. Realistically you're not going to be able to tackle from behind until the player and ball are stationary.
Unless you can convince FIFA that shielding the ball is unsporting behaviour it will inevitably end up with fouls like that and obviously, players exaggerate it because attempting to ride it demonstrably reduces your chances of gaining a free-kick.

My pet hate is striker one on one with the 'keeper. The 'keeper goes down to smother the ball, the striker kicks the ball away with the outside of the boot, runs into the 'keeper and wins a pen.
Click to expand...

Shielding the ball is fine, it's the deliberate instigation of contact and going down that is the issue.
 
FWIW I thought it was a clear foul, soft yes, but a clear foul in full view of the lino. If it had been given against us I would have been pissed off at our player for being so stupid. The defender didn't have to do it - he could have put Lerma under pressure without resorting to the push.
Of course Lerma made a Tom Daly out of it, I give him 9 out of 10 for style. Bit of payback for all those non yellow cards he gets all season.
As for shielding the ball the dividing line between shielding and obstruction is whether the ball is within playing distance of the shielding player. In this case it was.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I absolutely do not think its a foul at all. Any time a player deliberately invites contact then goes down equally as deliberately should not be given as a foul.



Shielding the ball is fine, it's the deliberate instigation of contact and going down that is the issue.
Click to expand...

Rule 12:

Direct free kick

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

  • charges
  • jumps at
  • kicks or attempts to kick
  • pushes
  • strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
  • tackles or challenges
  • trips or attempts to trip

If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.

  • Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
https://www.thefa.com/football-rule.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

It was a careless push. Not reckless or using excess force but careless, with no attempt to win the ball. As others have said it's a soft foul but the onus is with the challenging player to not do it. There are no rules about instigating contact and there was nothing that Lerma did to warrant a push.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I absolutely do not think its a foul at all. Any time a player deliberately invites contact then goes down equally as deliberately should not be given as a foul.
Click to expand...

I think that's the problem, you're getting into old handball territory. What constitutes an invitation? If you invite a challenge as a dummy to get around a player and get caught, it could very easily be mistaken.

Only simulation could cover that and even then it's a very fine line.

Shielding the ball is fine, it's the deliberate instigation of contact and going down that is the issue.
Click to expand...

It was theatrical and it was probably invited but in no way did Lerma instigate contact with the other player. He was moving away from the player with his back to him.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I absolutely do not think its a foul at all. Any time a player deliberately invites contact then goes down equally as deliberately should not be given as a foul.

Find that so hard to understand how you can think that's not a 100% foul,
Lerma is running to the corner flag and the lad does a blatant two handed push in his back in front of the linesman.
Click to expand...
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I like Lerma and he's done the same as 99% of players there, other than the silly theatrics, but I hate when these 'fouls' get given. They are completely manufactured by the player who gets fouled, get between the opposing player and the ball, stop dead and go down. It's pathetic and winds me up every time whether it's for or against us. This is a very bad example of this type of 'foul' too.
Click to expand...
It was a foul. The theatrics after though should have won him the Annual Adam Smith award.
 
Kudos said:
It's a station for knuckle-dragging morons who fetishize being baited by shock jocks.
Click to expand...
Not sure about that. They do have some poor presenters who bait the audience but I don't listen to them. Hawksby & Jacobs and The Sports Bar are good programmes. But Durham is good at what he does and by switching off when he's on is the best response.
 
Red Sky said:
Rule 12:

Direct free kick

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

  • charges
  • jumps at
  • kicks or attempts to kick
  • pushes
  • strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
  • tackles or challenges
  • trips or attempts to trip

If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.

  • Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
https://www.thefa.com/football-rule.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

It was a careless push. Not reckless or using excess force but careless, with no attempt to win the ball. As others have said it's a soft foul but the onus is with the challenging player to not do it. There are no rules about instigating contact and there was nothing that Lerma did to warrant a push.
Click to expand...

I know the rules. It's only careless because 99% of players deliberately go down in those circumstances to buy a cheap free kick. What can I say, I hate it every time it happens. It's a contact sport yet we have people routinely throwing themselves to the floor and refs buying it every time. Refs should make a judgement as to whether the contact is genuinely enough to send the player flying and if not play on. Most of the time players are timewasting in corners refs don't bother giving them a free kick even though they often get pushed from behind - because they've judged they don't deserve one.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I know the rules. It's only careless because 99% of players deliberately go down in those circumstances to buy a cheap free kick. What can I say, I hate it every time it happens. It's a contact sport yet we have people routinely throwing themselves to the floor and refs buying it every time. Refs should make a judgement as to whether the contact is genuinely enough to send the player flying and if not play on. Most of the time players are timewasting in corners refs don't bother giving them a free kick even though they often get pushed from behind - because they've judged they don't deserve one.
Click to expand...


They are laws, not rules.:):throw:
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I know the rules. It's only careless because 99% of players deliberately go down in those circumstances to buy a cheap free kick. What can I say, I hate it every time it happens. It's a contact sport yet we have people routinely throwing themselves to the floor and refs buying it every time. Refs should make a judgement as to whether the contact is genuinely enough to send the player flying and if not play on. Most of the time players are timewasting in corners refs don't bother giving them a free kick even though they often get pushed from behind - because they've judged they don't deserve one.
Click to expand...

So we can agree it's a foul then?
 
Red Sky said:
So we can agree it's a foul then?
Click to expand...

It is. In the same way that the microscopic toe offsides are factually correct or the ball slightly glancing off someone's arm in the build-up to a goal is handball. I don't like those interpretations either. All three make watching the game very frustrating in my opinion.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
It is. In the same way that the microscopic toe offsides are factually correct or the ball slightly glancing off someone's arm in the build-up to a goal is handball. I don't like those interpretations either. All three make watching the game very frustrating in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Oh come on, it was a clear push. Nothing miscroscopic about it.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
It is. In the same way that the microscopic toe offsides are factually correct or the ball slightly glancing off someone's arm in the build-up to a goal is handball. I don't like those interpretations either. All three make watching the game very frustrating in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I think maybe it's the play-acting element that is the frustrating bit. I can't agree we shouldn't be giving fouls for a 2 handed shove but I can get on board with the exaggeration or rolling around bit (I'm 100% on board regarding the VAR offsides and handballs). I'm not sure where to draw the line but there are already rules for simulation. Perhaps you could give the free kick for the foul but book the player for play-acting under the simulation rule.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;