Alonso's Arm vs Bellerin's head

[Russell Jones]

'Deliberate' hasn't been in the LOTG for a long time. Go check on all the wordings around Serious Foul Play and violent conduct and tell me where 'deliberate' is a prerequisite for a red card.

I understand and agree with the point you are making. 'Intent' or 'deliberate' is an easy trap to fall into and one we should be wary of. My reason for talking about a swinging arm or pointed elbow is that, by their very nature, those specific things increase the risk of endangering your opponent (whether you intend to or not). So the distinction between a pointed elbow and a flat one remains relevant when deciding whether a player has acted without due care for his opponent's safety

lead with your arm at the player's head

Had Bellerin been initially standing where the impact finally occured then this might be fair. But in reality Bellerin also jumped into the point of contact so it is totally unfair to label this situation as Alonso leading with his arm AT anything.

I've watched the clip dozens of times now. The two players both take off simultaneously and Alonso heads the ball at pretty much the same time the two players come together so no 'man first' scenario either. If Bellerin had jumped 6 inches higher or lower (as he well might have done) we wouldn't even be having this conversation ...

 

[A Freethinker]

Had Bellerin been initially standing where the impact finally occured then this might be fair. But in reality Bellerin also jumped into the point of contact so it is totally unfair to label this situation as Alonso leading with his arm AT anything..

So Bellerin isn't allowed to legally challenge for the ball and Alonso don't have to have cognisance of the safety of the other players around him? He leads with the arm, he makes contact with Bellerin and KNOCKS him out. Now I am not disputing that Bellerin challenges for the ball nor Alonso for that matter, my issue is that Alonso makes contact with Bellerin before the ball (with his forearm), now if this was a foot challenge and Alonso kicks Bellerin before the ball arrives is it a foul? Yes If he kicks Bellerin in a dangerous manner is it a sanction? Yes When a player goes for a bicycle kick and lumps some ones head is it a foul? Yes Why because he has to be aware of other players around him and there safety... hence when you lead your arm you are actively/deliberately going into a challenge not worried about what happens to the other player during the challenge.

In Padfoots pic it is clear that Bellerin has already been smashed before the ball has been headed by Alonso, so how is that not a foul? Sanctions we can debate but foul IMHO every day of the week!

GraemeS I wasn't debating about your foul call I was pointing out the arm doesn't have to swing nor there be a pointed elbow for the challenge to be red/yellow!

 

[Russell Jones]

@A Freethinker , now you're putting words in my mouth instead of in Graeme's! For clarity, I agree this is a foul and I can see a case for a yellow card.

In Padfoots pic it is clear that Bellerin has already been smashed before the ball

Actually, I think the picture shows clearly that contact with ball and player is (more or less) simultaneous.

More generally, I think this thread shows one of the reasons why football is such a great sport. A large number of referees on here (whose opinions I value and respect) viewing the same incident in markedly different ways. No wonder the game evokes such strong passion and opinions

 

[A Freethinker]

@A Freethinker
Actually, I think the picture shows clearly that contact with ball and player is (more or less) simultaneous. /QUOTE]

Look at Bellerin's head it is pushed back by Alonso's arm prior to contact agreed split second potentially...nonetheless leading with the arm in this instance he makes contact with another player in what I consider to be a dangerous fashion given Bellerin was knocked out and forced to leave the pitch...in rugby he could miss up to four weeks because of the concussion rules! IMHO that to me is enough to change card colour, we have a duty of care to all players.

The position of the arm when jumping and it being excused by people saying it's for balance and its natural etc when I played I only ever used my elbows/arms when jumping for one purpose and it wasn't for balance! hence why maybe I would advocate more stern punishment of the offence.

If Alonso's fist had of been clenched then there would be no doubt he was trying to hurt Bellerin whilst the open hand suggests a genuine challenge I still think there is absolutely no need whatsoever to lead with an arm when challenging for a headed ball.

In saying that the referee/AR ruled no foul and goal....so that to them was the correct decision. I wonder if they reviewed it now when they make the same one?

I once stood with five other referees watching a match I think we agreed about twice the whole game on decisions made by the referee and they were blatant decisions we agreed on! That's why I think these are the most important words in the Laws of the Game "in the opinion of the referee" covers everything!


ps. I wasn't getting at you either Russell just trying to make my point about swinging/pointy elbows.

 

[Trip]

Alonso makes contact with Bellerin before the ball (with his forearm), now if this was a foot challenge and Alonso kicks Bellerin before the ball arrives is it a foul?

This 'contact with the player before the ball' thing is only relevant if one of the players is in possession of the ball and the other is challenging for it. In a case where neither player is in possession, they both challenge, and they make contact with each other before either of them gets the ball, it's not necessarily a foul.

Alonso does actually make contact with the ball, Bellerin only makes contact with Alonso. Has Bellerin fouled Alonso? Of course not.

(I'm not arguing that it's not a foul. I'm only pointing out that contact before the ball is irrelevant in this case.)

 

[A Freethinker]

In this instance I would suggest that the 'contact' with Alonso's forearm across Bellerin's head is pivotal to the debate - is it fair or not? If Alonso's arm isn't there would Bellerin won the ball? Similar to a player pulling out of a tackle when studs are high? Winning the ball is irrelevant if the challenge is reckless etc in this case IMHO the arm stretched out in front of him makes it at least a reckless challenge whether he wins the ball or not?

 

[GraemeS]

In this instance I would suggest that the 'contact' with Alonso's forearm across Bellerin's head is pivotal to the debate - is it fair or not? If Alonso's arm isn't there would Bellerin won the ball? Similar to a player pulling out of a tackle when studs are high? Winning the ball is irrelevant if the challenge is reckless etc in this case IMHO the arm stretched out in front of him makes it at least a reckless challenge whether he wins the ball or not?

Again, there's not much argument with this. But I don't see what you and Padfoot seem to be seeing that escalates it to SFP (consequences DO NOT count!)

 

[A Freethinker]

(consequences DO NOT count!)

Agreed but the action of leading with the arm does!

 

[A Freethinker]

was challenging for the ball using it for balance ref?



Natural position

 

[GraemeS]

And neither of those are anything like what we're discussing....

 

[SM]

Getting a bit circular and retreading existing points. Agree to disagree, move on.

 

[Padfoot]

Getting a bit circular and retreading existing points. Agree to disagree, move on.

I think we've agreed that the "no foul, no card" people have it woefully wrong....//


Yep, lets move on.....

 

[SM]

Course mate, course.

 

[Mooseybaby]

Combined with another frustrating week at work and reading this thread, safe to say I am rapidly losing the will to live!

 

[Trip]

Violent conduct with one hand and wearing a wedding ring on the other.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

The debate itself has been done to death; does anybody else think that a group of referees, looking at the same video, have opinions of no foul, foul and no card, foul and yellow card, foul and red card?

Is it my imagination or does this highlight some deep problems with refereeing and how the LOTG are taught/written?

Especially when there are some arguments that some people are using (eg natural position) to justify their decision,when others are saying that it shouldn't even be a consideration here.

That indicates that it isn't a case of seeing different things in the one video, as it often is - it's completely different understandings of how to approach the decision.

Any assessor knows the reason behind making a decision is more important than the decision itself, particularly wrong ones - but when there are such different variations in reasoning here - is it my imagination, or should this really not be the case? If nothing else we should be agreeing on what to look for as a starting point.

I know it's not the first time we've seen very fundamental differences in approach and understanding here though.

Please note I'm not trying to reiterate my earlier arguments that the reasoning of others is wrong - simply discussing the differences themselves.

 

[A Freethinker]

The debate itself has been done to death; does anybody else think that a group of referees, looking at the same video, have opinions of no foul, foul and no card, foul and yellow card, foul and red card?

Is it my imagination or does this highlight some deep problems with refereeing and how the LOTG are taught/written?

I would disagree I attend a meeting every month where opinion is split across of room of 80 referees...also the type and level of football comes into it as well as experience and tolerance. It is what makes football different to many other sports and why debates like this are so good. We all have seen it and we all see different things and 'in the opinion of the ref' on the day it was no foul...so we accept his decision and debate what we would have done. Our debate can highlight issues others may not have taken into consideration and help them think about what they would do in a similar circumstance.

However as Padfoot say "I think we've agreed that the "no foul, no card" people have it woefully wrong....//"

 

[bloovee]

If we're counting opinions...
Foul. Careless so no need for card.
The criteria for careless are not that onerous: "Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when
making a challenge or acts without precaution".
I'd be reluctant to upgrade to a caution as he might well have got to it without leading with the arm - but he did lead with both arms.

 

[Sheffields Finest]

For my two penneth and coming from an age long ago when this type of challenge was not only legal but expected too..

As an attacking manager I'd be proud for my striker to be going for this and executing it, as a defending manager i'd be wondering why my defender hasn't done his job properly. Yes football has become sedated and this old skool challenge in isolation looks worse than it probably was, No intent to injure i'm sure but football is a contact sport and these things do happen. I saw this at match speed and i thought good goal, the stills don't look good but anything slowed down looks worse....

 

[richard ramjane]

The debate itself has been done to death; does anybody else think that a group of referees, looking at the same video, have opinions of no foul, foul and no card, foul and yellow card, foul and red card?

Is it my imagination or does this highlight some deep problems with refereeing and how the LOTG are taught/written?

Especially when there are some arguments that some people are using (eg natural position) to justify their decision,when others are saying that it shouldn't even be a consideration here.

That indicates that it isn't a case of seeing different things in the one video, as it often is - it's completely different understandings of how to approach the decision.

Any assessor knows the reason behind making a decision is more important than the decision itself, particularly wrong ones - but when there are such different variations in reasoning here - is it my imagination, or should this really not be the case? If nothing else we should be agreeing on what to look for as a starting point.

I know it's not the first time we've seen very fundamental differences in approach and understanding here though.

Please note I'm not trying to reiterate my earlier arguments that the reasoning of others is wrong - simply discussing the differences themselves.

also to add to that , that if these are the sort of incidents that are to be decided by ''video refereeing'' in the future.... could make for some lengthy afternoons !