A&H

Wolves v Citee

The Referee Store
Encroachment..? Seriously?...MC players first in and more in. Harsh given the usual leniency even post VAR on this offence...
 
DevonRef said:
Encroachment..? Seriously?...MC players first in and more in. Harsh given the usual leniency even post VAR on this offence...
Click to expand...

only seen it the once, but it’s either the wolves player who encroach ended up clearing ... or keepers foot not on line 🤷‍♂️
 
So let’s forget the actual encroachment just concentrate on who gets the rebound... what a cop out!
 
I don't get the complants here. Dendoncker trod on Mahrez's foot and that is a penalty even if it is difficult to spot real time.

Then on the penalty they have been clear all along that they will use VAR on penalty encroachment only if it impacts on the outcome, he's cleared the ball so clearly affected the outcome.
 
Sheffields Finest said:
So let’s forget the actual encroachment just concentrate on who gets the rebound... what a cop out!
Click to expand...

Agree. I think the encroachment fiasco is one of the reasons that some push for a PK being a dead ball event, with a GK if it doesn't score.

But what is really jarring to me is the disconnect between how we look at the GK and the other players. For the GK (who is the player most on the spot), we look to the millimeter--and then caution him if he times it poorly. But for the players who have nothing immediately to do, we shuffle around and don't take it seriously unless they get the ball--and their infraction is a retake, but not a caution.

The VAR nit picking of GK movement changed the way GKs played in the WC. If we care about encroachment, all it takes is to say that all encroachment is going to be called, and VAR will check. Attackers just aren't going to go in if they actually believe a ball can be taken out of the net if they do. Today, however, they know that will never happen in a top tier game, so of course they go in early as there is no consequence. And one they are going to do that, of course the defenders are going to go in early.
 
Mr Dean said:
If the encroaching Wolves player was clued up, he would've left the ball and let the encroaching City player score. Unusual how VAR has introduced scenarios where it is more beneficial for a team to let their opponents score rather than defend the goal.
Click to expand...

But it isn't. Since players from both teams encroached, the consequence is a retake.
 
Big Cat said:
If the defender left it, the encroachment would've been overlooked. I think that's what @Mr Dean is inferring
Click to expand...

If the defender left it for an encroaching attacker, we still have an offense that will be called because the encroaching attacker got to the ball. And once play is stopped for an encroaching attacker, and it is clear that there were players from both teams encroaching, then restart is a retake. (Didn't we have an extended thread about the unfairness of how this plays out as essentially the only real world result of encroaching is retaking a PK and never of pulling the ball out of the goal?)
 
socal lurker said:
If the defender left it for an encroaching attacker, we still have an offense that will be called because the encroaching attacker got to the ball. And once play is stopped for an encroaching attacker, and it is clear that there were players from both teams encroaching, then restart is a retake. (Didn't we have an extended thread about the unfairness of how this plays out as essentially the only real world result of encroaching is retaking a PK and never of pulling the ball out of the goal?)
Click to expand...
Not sure i was engaged in that symposium :confused:
 
Shoulder to back that? Or have I missed something! (again)... Prepare for forum meltdown 😂
 
Last edited:
socal lurker said:
If the defender left it for an encroaching attacker, we still have an offense that will be called because the encroaching attacker got to the ball. And once play is stopped for an encroaching attacker, and it is clear that there were players from both teams encroaching, then restart is a retake. (Didn't we have an extended thread about the unfairness of how this plays out as essentially the only real world result of encroaching is retaking a PK and never of pulling the ball out of the goal?)
Click to expand...

Yes, if the attacking player who encroached scored from the rebound and there were players from both teams encroaching, it would be retaken. If the attacking player didn't score then it wouldn't be though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top