Jump to content

The Semi-Finals: Argentina and France through


54

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

I think it's 50/50 like. Open to interpretation.


Here as well, however, the fact they’ve gotten three dubious penalties (and four in total) in 5.5 games says it all for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Eveready said:

If a defender In the middle of the pitch runs straight at a guy dribbling and just about manages to stop as the attacker runs into him then surely it’s a foul.

 

The ITV pundits seem very upset Argentina are winning.

If the guy dribbling runs into the defender its not though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Wolfcastle said:

If the guy dribbling runs into the defender its not though.

Agreed, if the guy is just standing there.  But if you run right up to him then in my opinion you have to have both your feet planted for a couple of second to claim you’re still and he ran into you and not vice versa.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Flip said:

Referee on TV saying he wouldn’t have given the penalty. Goalkeeper has all the right to try and make a save and it’s Alvarez that runs into him.

 

I’m leaning more towards a pk, but Argentina has really had all the decisions go their way this WC... :tiote:

 

Ball bouncing in front of goal after the shot means it can be given IMO. If it goes out for a goalkick I would never give the pen. Still a bit soft but can understand it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Kimbo said:

In the middle of the pitch you can’t just poke the ball in a random direction and then run into whoever is challenging you, then get a freekick for it. Or at least you shouldn’t.

What about if you poked it past  (or nutmugged) the defender in the direction you were running?  Because they should be the comparison and in my understanding it’s a free kick every time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Eveready said:

What about if you poked it past  (or nutmugged) the defender in the direction you were running?  Because they should be the comparison and in my understanding it’s a free kick every time.


I would say you can’t meg someone and run into them and get a freekick for it.

 

 

Edited by Kimbo

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pata said:

 

Ball bouncing in front of goal after the shot means it can be given IMO. If it goes out for a goalkick I would never give the pen. Still a bit soft but can understand it.

That’s not how the laws work though.  It doesn’t matter if it was bouncing towards the goal (besides which, the covering defender would have cleared either way).  The likely outcome doesn’t factor into whether or not something is a foul

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you meg someone or knock it past them you should be going around them, not running straight into them and getting a freekick for it. I know they get given but that is my view of it.

 

 

Edited by Kimbo

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

That’s not how the laws work though.  It doesn’t matter if it was bouncing towards the goal (besides which, the covering defender would have cleared either way).  The likely outcome doesn’t factor into whether or not something is a foul


I’m 100% sure that if you asked Orsato about it he would say it as a reason. Alvarez might not have reached it but when the ball stays in danger area Livakovic’ contact is not just an attempt to save it but also obstruction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...