The Ref Stop

Stoke v Chelsea

HoofItYouDonkey

HoofItYouDonkey

RefChat Addict
Level 6 Referee
Chelsea forward hurdles the keeper to avoid contact as the keeper dives. No penalty. "There is no contact, so it can't be a penalty!!".
Rubbish, there does not have to be contact, that was a penalty. Anyone else see this? "Trips or attempts to trip"
 
The Ref Stop
Shearer then says that it should be a penalty because the keeper "impeded" him. No, Alan. Impeding is an IDFK (although I agree that it should have been a penalty for the reason HIYD says.)
 
To be honest I was more miffed at one how Chelsea managed to lose that game after battering Stoke for most of the 90 minutes and two how Charlie Adam managed to survive the game without a yellow card!

Blatant handball to block a cross, stuck out an arm arm to block the ball then had the nerve to complain when it was given. Fairly cynical challenge, foul given, looked a yellow all day long, no card again. Then followed it up with an challenge when he led with an elbow into the back of a Chelsea player's head!

Extremely lenient refereeing from Anthony Taylor. :confused:
 
Remi certainly got penalised for his honesty. :)

Taylor is getting slammed for what he did, so what could the ref have done differently;

Blow straight after the challenge (while Remi scrabbling) give the penalty for the challenge and send butland off? Then deal with the abuse from Chelsea when the ball ends up in the goal despite the whistle having been blown. Stoke argue the goal scoring opportunity was still there, as the ball went in.

For those of you screaming at their monitors "but Remi scuffed it!" - we all know that the footie gods would have ensured that shot went in if the referee blows his whistle! They are good like that!!!! :D

I honestly don't know what the best approach to this kind of situation is. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
 
Sorry I am not as certain as you about this should be a penalty.

Did he attempt to trip the player? No, he attempted to challenge for the ball.

Did his challenge cause Remy to fall over? No, his poor jump and landing did this.

Sorry, This is one of the few incidents where you have to take the contact for the penalty.

I am willing to be shot down, but convince me, please.
 
HoofItYouDonkey said:
Chelsea forward hurdles the keeper to avoid contact as the keeper dives. No penalty. "There is no contact, so it can't be a penalty!!".
Rubbish, there does not have to be contact, that was a penalty. Anyone else see this? "Trips or attempts to trip"
Click to expand...
The attempts is to stop the deliberate act of an illegal tackle but misses the intended player.
 
lincs22 said:
The attempts is to stop the deliberate act of an illegal tackle but misses the intended player.
Click to expand...
Well I am confused then.
So if a player comes in to make a sliding tackle, with a genuine attempt to get the ball (not deliberate); if contact is made with the player (not the ball), that's a foul, but if the attacker jumps over the leg (or keeper's arms) to avoid the leg (or arm), that's not a foul???
So we have to decide if an attempted tackle is a deliberate attempt to foul a player??
 
A deliberate attempt to trip would be something like, a player being a bit of a div, looking for a cheeky leg swipe and missing. In my opinion anyway. If a player makes a slide tackle, and the player hurdles it, im not going to give it if he falls over. If he wants the foul, draw it from the tackle, dont try and be a hurdler and claim a foul when you balls up the landing.
 
It would take a lot of convincing to get me to accept the "attempt to trip" argument too. If it were like some here say it is, you can call any challenge by a keeper for the ball an attempt to trip. Being at liberty, within the PA, to use their whole body to perform saves, it is natural and logical for keepers to get their body in the way. Of course, if the challenge turns into a foul, a PK (and, in circumstances, a sanction) should follow. But blaming the keeper for a misjudged jump by the player? Not in my book. And yes, Alan Shearer was - not for the first time - spouting nonsense.
 
HoofItYouDonkey said:
Chelsea forward hurdles the keeper to avoid contact as the keeper dives. No penalty. "There is no contact, so it can't be a penalty!!".
Rubbish, there does not have to be contact, that was a penalty. Anyone else see this? "Trips or attempts to trip"
Click to expand...

I think Anthony Taylor let play continue as Remy had a fairly simple chance to score. It isn't his fault Loic Remy missed an open net
 
Steve C said:
A deliberate attempt to trip would be something like, a player being a bit of a div, looking for a cheeky leg swipe and missing. In my opinion anyway. If a player makes a slide tackle, and the player hurdles it, im not going to give it if he falls over. If he wants the foul, draw it from the tackle, dont try and be a hurdler and claim a foul when you balls up the landing.
Click to expand...
:confused::confused: If a player has to jump over a tackle to avoid being taken out and then stumbles and falls it is 100% a foul and should be pulled back if the players stride is lost in any way .....even if he loses a couple a yard or so then another player comes over and wins the ball ....He has been impeded and it should be a FK or a Pen.
 
Beezer said:
:confused::confused: If a player has to jump over a tackle to avoid being taken out and then stumbles and falls it is 100% a foul and should be pulled back if the players stride is lost in any way .....even if he loses a couple a yard or so then another player comes over and wins the ball ....He has been impeded and it should be a FK or a Pen.
Click to expand...
That's the way I saw it...
 
Beezer, looks like you're trying to breathe new life into the "advantage in the PA" debate ;):D

Seriously, though, in their post-match analyses, Dermot Gallagher, Keith Hackett and other (former) referees agree that by the letter of the law Taylor was right not to award a penalty. As I said before, it would make any attempt by a goalkeeper to win the ball an "attempt to trip". I find that very hard, if not impossible, to accept.
 
As I say @RefereeingBooks I didn't even see the Stoke v Chelsea game was just a general observation ;) and if the advantage thread ever pops up again , though I stand by my beliefs on the issue ....I will stay well away from it :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top