Jump to content

Football. Sweden then (probably) France, a Waterloo double?


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

They are laws, not rules. But okay then.

This is from the FA's own website.

A free kick is awarded if a player trips or attempts to trip an opponent.

Not a word about whether it's accidental contact or not.

Well 'attempt' clearly can't be accidental so that implies deliberate action. The three categories of foul which inludes tripping are defined before that though and they are careless, reckless and using excessive force. Careless is defined as 'lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge' or acting 'without precaution'. Both 'making a challenge' and 'acting' are by their nature deliberate.

ETA: Going back to your original example I think it's very unlikely a defender would be close enough to wipe out a player about to take a shot in without being in the process of making a challenge but players are falling over each other all the time at set pieces. Fouls for tripping in the box are hardly ever given because it's accidental (or at least the ref has the excuse of viewing it as accidental).

Edited by ljkeane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Qui bono' should apply. A player/team benefiting from an error feels more unfair than being punished for one, IMO.

Edited by lacuna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ljkeane said:

Well 'attempt' clearly can't be accidental so that implies deliberate action. The three categories of foul which inludes tripping are defined before that though and they are careless, reckless and using excessive force. Careless is defined as 'lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge' or acting 'without precaution'. Both 'making a challenge' and 'acting' are by their nature deliberate.

ETA: Going back to your original example I think it's very unlikely a defender would be close enough to wipe out a player about to take a shot in without being in the process of making a challenge but players are falling over each other all the time at set pieces. Fouls for tripping in the box are hardly ever given because it's accidental (or at least the ref has the excuse of viewing it as accidental).

Alright Judge Judy.

Here's the thing, though. If it has to be a deliberate action for a foul to be awarded, how do you explain the new double jeopardy rule, which prevents the double punishment of a player being sent off and a penalty being given if it is an accidental challenge?

Double jeopardy rule explained: The reason David Luiz was sent off for Arsenal against Wolves

 

Edited by Spockydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule is it’s not a red card if it’s a deliberate attempt to play the ball. Doesn’t mean it’s an ‘accidental challenge’, it can still be careless or reckless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ljkeane said:

The rule is it’s not a red card if it’s a deliberate attempt to play the ball. Doesn’t mean it’s an ‘accidental challenge’, it can still be careless or reckless.

Sure.

But could careless or reckless be adjectives used to describe putting your studs on the ground where somebody's hand already is?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Sure.

But could careless or reckless be adjectives used to describe putting your studs on the ground where somebody's hand already is?

 

To clarify what I’m saying it doesn’t have to be a deliberate attempt to foul to be penalised but it has to be a deliberate act leading to whatever happens. ETA: Except if the ball hits your arm and leads to a goal now.

So if you know somebody is lying on the ground and you come flying in to win the ball it’s your responsibility not to stand on them, so that could be careless or reckless. If you deliberately stand on them it’s arguably violent conduct. On the other hand if they fall over as you’re stepping back or something and it’s a complete accident it’s just play on.

Edited by ljkeane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barcelona are such a scummy club. Majority of their fans are busy kissing Laporta's arse though. It's like a cult.

https://theathletic.com/3484447/2022/08/08/barcelona-de-jong-contract-legal-action/

Paywalled but here's the gist:

Quote

Barcelona have told Frenkie de Jong they want to annul his existing contract and return to the deal he was on before, alleging the terms given to him by the club’s previous board involved criminality and provide grounds for legal action against those involved (and have warned that De Jong and his representatives may also be implicated).

It was a two-year extension until 2026 that is reported to have reduced his salary for the 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons, leaving €18 million to be spread across the subsequent four years.

 

ETA. more Laporta fuckery. :lol:

 

Edited by Consigliere
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Consigliere said:

Barcelona are such a scummy club. Majority of their fans are busy kissing Laporta's arse though. It's like a cult.

This is fucking outrageous. And as I've already said, it's only a matter of time before serious players start avoiding this club like the plague.

They've 'signed' all these top level players, but are not allowed to register them.

Absolute clown car of a football club.

Edited by Spockydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ljkeane said:

It pretty much does have to be deliberate. The player might not mean the consequence of a challenge so they can be yellow or red carded for being reckless but it has to be a deliberate challenge. Accidentally standing on someone isn't a foul.

It pretty much doesn't, really. Players are responsible for their actions, regardless of intent.

There are countless examples of players trying to do one thing and making a mistake resulting in a foul. If you step on your opponent's foot that's a foul for different reasons - you could injure him, you could hinder his movement ability etc. It doesn't matter if you do it deliberately or not, the consequences are the same. Except in some savage instances of going deliberately to severely hurt someone.

Intent does matter when refs are trying to determine the appropriate punishment, though. At least when we are talking about good refs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, baxus said:

It pretty much doesn't, really. Players are responsible for their actions, regardless of intent.

There are countless examples of players trying to do one thing and making a mistake resulting in a foul.

One of ours, David Luiz I think, got sent off and conceded a penalty when an opponent clipped his heel when his back was turned. Like, Luiz was completely passive in that situation, but still got sent off.

 

 

Edited by Spockydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Not before you agreed to cover the 20m of de Jong's deterred wages out of sheer desperation.

 

United aren't going to pay his deferred wages because that's not the only thing stopping him from joining United. As I (and others) suspected from the start, De Jong doesn't really want to join United but was stringing the club along as a safety net hoping that a better option presents itself. Chelsea are now interested, can offer CL football and per Ornstein, the club are also willing to pay his deferred wages should they decide to make a formal offer but they are currently still working on a deal to sign Fofana and reportedly it may take a fee in excess of £80m to convince Leicester to sell.

Edited by Consigliere
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, lacuna said:

'Qui bono' should apply. A player/team benefiting from an error feels more unfair than being punished for one, IMO.

It's 'Cui bono', tho. 

As for Barca de Jong, this is no longer funny. I think Laporta threatening criminal action over a deal the player signed to help the club is really more than a bit too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...