Jump to content

World Cup 2018 thread


jackhasler23

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
32 minutes ago, sage said:

He got a faint touch on the ball which carried on it's original path at a similar pace, then his swipe missed the French player's front foot but landed on his back ankle bringing him down, Penalty.

Getting to the ball first is enough. Has to be.

If you start trying to judge degrees of contact with the ball, (sufficient, insufficient, where did it go...) the law becomes impossible to consistently apply.

No penalty.

 

Anyway, I guess we'll have to agree to differ. Just know that you're wrong.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, needles said:

Getting to the ball first is enough. Has to be.

If you start trying to judge degrees of contact with the ball, (sufficient, insufficient, where did it go...) the law becomes impossible to consistently apply.

No penalty.

 

Anyway, I guess we'll have to agree to differ. Just know that you're wrong.?

That isn't the law.

We will have to agree to agree that I'm right.

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, needles said:

Getting to the ball first is enough. Has to be.

If you start trying to judge degrees of contact with the ball, (sufficient, insufficient, where did it go...) the law becomes impossible to consistently apply.

No penalty.

 

Anyway, I guess we'll have to agree to differ. Just know that you're wrong.?

Getting the ball first is not enough. See Law 12.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Getting the ball first is not enough. See Law 12.

Then the law needs changing. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, needles said:

Getting to the ball first is enough. Has to be.

If you start trying to judge degrees of contact with the ball, (sufficient, insufficient, where did it go...) the law becomes impossible to consistently apply.

No penalty.

 

Anyway, I guess we'll have to agree to differ. Just know that you're wrong.?

So if you get the ball first, it doesn't matter if you foul the player afterwards? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Getting the ball first is not enough. See Law 12.

Just did, very briefly...still don't see your point. Wasn't reckless...what am I missing?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ketteringram said:

So if you get the ball first, it doesn't matter if you foul the player afterwards? 

So long as it's not reckless, dangerous or so on, yes.

How many times a game do you see two players challenge for the ball and have contact after the ball has gone? How many of those are fouls?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, needles said:

Just did, very briefly...still don't see your point. Wasn't reckless...what am I missing?

 

'Careless, reckless or using excessive force'. That's all a matter of opinion. It's what the referee is there for. Or at least that's what they used to be for before VAR.

The whole emphasis of Law 12 is not the result of the tackle but its execution. Winning the ball first does not negate the manner of the challenge.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...