Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS, SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

[Archived] Other PL happenings 2010-2011

Tom

By Tom
in Football Messageboard Archive

Recommended Posts

thenodrog World Cup

thenodrog

Posted
Posted

However, IMO, watching the Diouff tactic leading up to our goal, there could be a case for dismissing him, due to serious foul play.

Good grief! A barge/shoulder charge....Serious foul play...dismissal!! :rolleyes:

On anybody else but a goalkeeper it wouldn't even get a bloody mention.

  • Replies 3.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
92er Champions League

92er

Posted
Posted

We can't moan too much about the Schwartzer hand ball as it was karma for Brown getting away with it for us against the Dingles last season....

The tv showed Brown was not outside his box.

  • Backroom
DE. World Cup

DE.

Posted
  • Backroom
Posted

Deliberate handball outside the area would only be a yellow card / caution for 'unsporting behaviour'. He wasn't last man and it didn't directly dny a goal-scoring opportunity as the ball went forward toward the goal, where it was cleared by a player on the line.

It surprises me how many people don't know the basic laws of the game, including (and perhaps especially) the idiots in the media (BBC, newspapers etc). So yes Schwartzer should have been cautioned, but no he should not have been dismissed.

However, IMO, watching the Diouff tactic leading up to our goal, there could be a case for dismissing him, due to serious foul play. Having said that, the referee has to actually see the incident and recognise it as such before he can take action.

Not looking forward to tonight -

I've seen goalies sent off for deliberate handball outside the area plenty of times before, and I think you could argue the ball was going towards the goal creating a goal-scoring opportunity.

And Diouf being sent off for serious foul play? Give over. It was a yellow at most, it's not like that little barge could have seriously injured Schwartzer. If Diouf had been sent off for that it would have been ridiculous.

Wild Irish Rover Premier League

Wild Irish Rover

Posted
Posted

Good grief! A barge/shoulder charge....Serious foul play...dismissal!! :rolleyes:

On anybody else but a goalkeeper it wouldn't even get a bloody mention.

The bloke had no other intention than to foul the keeper. If it had been a barge into another player it is possible, but less likely that it would have led directly to a goal. As it was the keeper, however, my conclusion is that it was entirely planned and pre-meditated, which makes it more serious than a simple 'rush of blood' in the heat of the moment when going in for a challenge. It's the kind of tactic that spoils the game of football for players and spectators alike, and causes major problems for referees. And before you ask, I have been a referee for 23 years and many thousands of games at all levels, so I feel I have a reasonable opinion. Of course your opinion is valid too, especially when you take the laws of the game into account, which far too many pundits and posters consistently fail to do.

I say get rid of the cheats in football. At all levels

Miker Champions League

Miker

Posted
Posted

The bloke had no other intention than to foul the keeper. If it had been a barge into another player it is possible, but less likely that it would have led directly to a goal.

...

I say get rid of the cheats in football. At all levels

For it to be a foul, Diouf would have had to have made a "careless or reckless challenge or used excessive force on the keeper". He did none of those. The shoulder barge has always been part of the game and used to outmuscle the opposition and for tactical purposes. IMO, he had every right to nudge the keeper away from the ball. As you said, people have the right to disagree, but it's something I will never accept or understand because when I played, being physical was just part of the game and not considered foul play or cheating.

92er Champions League

92er

Posted
Posted

For it to be a foul, Diouf would have had to have made a "careless or reckless challenge or used excessive force on the keeper". He did none of those. The shoulder barge has always been part of the game and used to outmuscle the opposition and for tactical purposes. IMO, he had every right to nudge the keeper away from the ball. As you said, people have the right to disagree, but it's something I will never accept or understand because when I played, being physical was just part of the game and not considered foul play or cheating.

Was it shoulder to shoulder?

I missed it live and of course they didn't show it again at the ground.

rigger World Cup

rigger

Posted
Posted

The bloke had no other intention than to foul the keeper. If it had been a barge into another player it is possible, but less likely that it would have led directly to a goal. As it was the keeper, however, my conclusion is that it was entirely planned and pre-meditated, which makes it more serious than a simple 'rush of blood' in the heat of the moment when going in for a challenge. It's the kind of tactic that spoils the game of football for players and spectators alike, and causes major problems for referees. And before you ask, I have been a referee for 23 years and many thousands of games at all levels, so I feel I have a reasonable opinion. Of course your opinion is valid too, especially when you take the laws of the game into account, which far too many pundits and posters consistently fail to do.

I say get rid of the cheats in football. At all levels

It could be said that what he did was purposely position his body so the keeper could not get to the ball, is that not what happens when a player shields the ball out of play, with no intension of playing the ball.

rebelmswar World Cup

rebelmswar

Posted
Posted

It could be said that what he did was purposely position his body so the keeper could not get to the ball, is that not what happens when a player shields the ball out of play, with no intension of playing the ball.

I don't hold it against him but it must be said that Spit has no other intention than to knock him over. He was looking right at him, ignoring th ball completely - if it was American Football it would be flagged as pass interference every time.

Worked though, and as Theno I think said, it will be a differemt player next time. Spitty would probably be back defending our goal next game.

Hughesy World Cup

Hughesy

Posted
Posted

Probably explains why we are not winning games!

Said it the other day - we lack abit of bite.

We need the players like NZonzi, Samba & Jones to start showing their strength abit more and going into tackles abit more forceful to let other teams know they are in a game.

joey_big_nose World Cup

joey_big_nose

Posted
Posted

Said it the other day - we lack abit of bite.

We need the players like NZonzi, Samba & Jones to start showing their strength abit more and going into tackles abit more forceful to let other teams know they are in a game.

I'm not sure Samba and Jones need to worry about that, but it would be a massive bonus if NZonzi starts being more physical and winning the ball. He stands off far too much for me.

daren Premier League

daren

Posted
Posted

The bloke had no other intention than to foul the keeper. If it had been a barge into another player it is possible, but less likely that it would have led directly to a goal. As it was the keeper, however, my conclusion is that it was entirely planned and pre-meditated, which makes it more serious than a simple 'rush of blood' in the heat of the moment when going in for a challenge. It's the kind of tactic that spoils the game of football for players and spectators alike, and causes major problems for referees. And before you ask, I have been a referee for 23 years and many thousands of games at all levels, so I feel I have a reasonable opinion. Of course your opinion is valid too, especially when you take the laws of the game into account, which far too many pundits and posters consistently fail to do.

I say get rid of the cheats in football. At all levels

It could be said that what he did was purposely position his body so the keeper could not get to the ball, is that not what happens when a player shields the ball out of play, with no intension of playing the ball.

I agree with rigger about the incident. Diouf poisitioned himself so Schwarzer couldn't go directly to the ball, and Schwarzer ran into him and fell over. There was never enough contact for the keeper to go down. Diouf did definitely look at Schwarzer and not the ball - but he got to his position first and held it. Schwarzer was looking for a soft free out, and to be fair, would have got it 9 out of 10 times.

ffan, we didn't target Dembele to be kicked off the pitch. He faded out of the game because your manager changed tactics and he didn't seem comfortable attacking the goal from the edge of the box. Sorry to hear about his injury though, he looks like a good player and it's a blow for you.

LeChuck World Cup

LeChuck

Posted
Posted
Diouf did definitely look at Schwarzer and not the ball - but he got to his position first and held it.

That's still obstruction. You can't just park yourself anywhere you want and not move. Definitely not a red card as someone else suggested, but definitely a foul.

If you're going to use your body to block the opposition's path to the ball then the ball has to be within playing distance (hence why it's okay to shepherd the ball out for goal kicks and so on).

  • Backroom
DE. World Cup

DE.

Posted
  • Backroom
Posted

I would certainly concede it was a foul, and possibly a booking as it was the second time in the game Diouf had attempted it, but no more than that.

Exiled_Rover World Cup

Exiled_Rover

Posted
Posted

Said it the other day - we lack abit of bite.

We need the players like NZonzi, Samba & Jones to start showing their strength abit more and going into tackles abit more forceful to let other teams know they are in a game.

No, we lack guile.

thenodrog World Cup

thenodrog

Posted
Posted

That's still obstruction. You can't just park yourself anywhere you want and not move. Definitely not a red card as someone else suggested, but definitely a foul.

That someone who would have sent EHD off and left the keeper on is a ref of long standing. Is it any wonder they get so much stick?

Guest bluerovers

Guest bluerovers

Posted
Posted

He claims several parties have already entered Due Diligence (bit like our situation then).

Also, why is when you have a debt of over £200m you can not make your repayments and simply have "negotiations" with the bank over when/how and how much has to be paid back; yet if I go overdrawn by a few quid i get a £10 penalty charge which I can't even query???

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.