A&H

Newcastle Vs West Ham

The Ginger Ref said:
Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
Click to expand...

There is no offence of obstruction. Obstruction may form part of impeding progress of an opponent but it is not a named offence as such.
The Ginger Ref said:
FA Laws of the Game
Click to expand...
The FA does not have their own laws ... The laws are written and maintained by IFAB
The Ginger Ref said:
--

Obstruction, or impeding the progress of an opponent, is when a player unfairly uses their body to prevent an opponent from getting to and/or playing the ball.

IFAB
Click to expand...

This does not appear in the IFAB laws of the game
 
The Referee Store
Jones was wrong to allow the QFK. Stuff of suicide in non-league football
I think Phillips was unlucky to concede the second PK. A 'busy' VAR... nothing new
Far too many games over the weekend lasting 110 minutes plus. Nobody wants that, but that's what everybody has got
 
Obstruction is the old word for impeding. I believe it changed in the 90s, though there was no material change to the offense. (Just as they changed from intentional to deliberate with no change in meaning.) But both then and now, it only applies when not in playing distance of the ball, so totally inapplicable to the matter at hand.
 
I can see why it’s a penalty, but I think the second one puts us in a dangerous place. Do we really want to reward players for just sticking themselves inbetween a players foot and the ball?
It’s a tough one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
An argument I saw on twitter and actually found quite persuasive:

What do we think if that's down the other end and Phillips is facing goal and shooting (rather than clearing) and Gordon just sticks his foot there with no play on the ball? I think you could make a fairly convincing argument for that being a failed attempt to tackle and therefore penalty to WH in that scenario.
 
Not for me. Philips is too slow, not looking, it’s careless. Simple for me. If a player gets between you and the ball you can’t thwack them in the back of the legs.
 
santa sangria said:
Not for me. Philips is too slow, not looking, it’s careless. Simple for me. If a player gets between you and the ball you can’t thwack them in the back of the legs.
Click to expand...
while i agree with this...

i find it unpalatable that Gordon can place his foot there, not in a position to get the ball and with no apparent intention to do so, just so it can get kicked and 'win the pen'.
 
in my view its not a pen as gordon made no contact with the ball but instead hooked his foot into the path of the kalvin Phillips. It could Hence be argued that Gordon has only attempted to impede kalvin phillips rather than play the ball.
 
Olayinka said:
in my view its not a pen as gordon made no contact with the ball but instead hooked his foot into the path of the kalvin Phillips. It could Hence be argued that Gordon has only attempted to impede kalvin phillips rather than play the ball.
Click to expand...
I agree. Gordon has simply put his foot there to initiate contact to try and win a penalty.

Now, we will see a lot more of these aimless attempts to win the ball and with the aim to get kicked instead.
 
The unfortunate thing about this scenario is whatever decision was made would have been criticised by one team. It's part of the game. It is subjective after all.
 
Gabriel said:
The unfortunate thing about this scenario is whatever decision was made would have been criticised by one team. It's part of the game. It is
santa sangria said:
Not for me. Philips is too slow, not looking, it’s careless. Simple for me. If a player gets between you and the ball you can’t thwack them in the back of the legs.
Click to expand...
Sounds like phillips got punished more for poor play rather than an infringement
Click to expand...
 
Gordon had his standing leg kicked out from under him. How it got there or why is immaterial. As per the LOTG the kick was careless and therefore a penalty was awarded. Practically unseeable in real time but VAR was able to show what happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top