[RU Devil]

It was a shame Blind was unavailable. It would've been interesting to see how a Blind/Herrera axis would've worked out with the team humming as they were. Even without a Blind or Carrick, we absolutely dominated possession and showed we could make do with what we did have last game. Although Rooney did a good job filling in, it would've been more interesting to have ADM do what Rooney did last game while having Rooney up top instead of Falcao. I think it came down to Rooney having a better range of passing & currently being more accurate (ADM has been atrocious with some of his passing lately).

Except for a few loose passes, Herrera acquitted himself well, despite being a bit outnumbered in the center. When it comes to him & Mata, I'd rather have him in the #10 role (if we actually played that role). He gives us more workrate & physical presence in that role and just about edges Mata in passing repertoire (not by much).

 

[rover]

i'm afraid there are too many people are wrong about "diving".

to decide whether if there is a penalty or not the main concern is whether if a defender do make a foul on an attacker inside the box. to decide there is a foul or not the main concern is whether if what the defender do is legal. what the attacker do is basically irrelevant to decide if the defender has made a foul on him or not

so the whole issue is, did the tackle cahill made on herrera legal? and the answer is certainly not.

cahill cut in the path of herrera when herrera already had the ball. cahill deliberately had his right foot intruded into the space where herrera had already occupied. herrera didn't run on cahill, herrera run into space, and then both the right legs of the both players collided and herrera fell down. so this is a foul since cahill illegally intruded into the space herrera had already occupied and made a contact, hence this is a penalty.

the action of herrera really doesn't matter on what cahill had done. you may wonder why some players falling down so easily since they could have carried on playing. but answering the question whether if this is a penalty you only need to decide if cahill did make a foul on herrera and this is definitely a yes.

just put the location of contact outside the box. how often do you think a ref would award a free kick? 8/9 out of 10

 

[No11]

i'm afraid there are too many people are wrong about "diving".

to decide whether if there is a penalty or not the main concern is whether if a defender do make a foul on an attacker inside the box. to decide there is a foul or not the main concern is whether if what the defender do is legal. what the attacker do is basically irrelevant to decide if the defender has made a foul on him or not

so the whole issue is, did the tackle cahill made on herrera legal? and the answer is certainly not.

cahill cut in the path of herrera when herrera already had the ball. cahill deliberately had his right foot intruded into the space where herrera had already occupied. herrera didn't run on cahill, herrera run into space, and then both the right legs of the both players collided and herrera fell down. so this is a foul since cahill illegally intruded into the space herrera had already occupied and made a contact, hence this is a penalty.

the action of herrera really doesn't matter on what cahill had done. you may wonder why some players falling down so easily since they could have carried on playing. but answering the question whether if this is a penalty you only need to decide if cahill did make a foul on herrera and this is definitely a yes.

just put the location of contact outside the box. how often do you think a ref would award a free kick? 8/9 out of 10

He dived.

 

[Brwned]

I find constant diving pathetic and annoying but trying to gain an advantage in a key moment of a huge game e.g. Gerrard in Istanbul is entirely understandable and not a big deal IMO. Widespread diving's a fairly recent development but gamesmanship's been part of the game since the beginning of last century. Varela and Uruguay's gamesmanship in the Maracanazo is still hailed in Uruguay as perhaps the defining moment in their footballing history and they're lauded for their cunning and desire to win using everything in their power.

Herrera's dive was a little annoying in the sense he took an unnecessary risk and threw away our last chance in the game, but it almost came off in fairness and I'd have had no problems whatsoever in celebrating an equaliser from it. It was clearly a dive though.

 

[Steev]

He dived.

Yep. Herrera deliberately engineered the contact with Cahill by trailing his right leg.

Why people are still debating this is a mystery to me.

 

[Walrus]

I find constant diving pathetic and annoying but trying to gain an advantage in a key moment of a huge game e.g. Gerrard in Istanbul is entirely understandable and not a big deal IMO. Widespread diving's a fairly recent development but gamesmanship's been part of the game since the beginning of last century. Varela and Uruguay's gamesmanship in the Maracanazo is still hailed in Uruguay as perhaps the defining moment in their footballing history and they're lauded for their cunning and desire to win using everything in their power.

Herrera's dive was a little annoying in the sense he took an unnecessary risk and threw away our last chance in the game, but it almost came off in fairness and I'd have had no problems whatsoever in celebrating an equaliser from it. It was clearly a dive though.

This is a ridiculous statement and to me, just proof of the amount of bias that you and other posters show towards Herrera. I can pretty much guarantee you wouldnt be say that if Young, Fellaini or Januzaj had done it.

Anyway I actually came to this thread to mention this little article from MEN, with Herrera's reaction to the Paul Scholes comparison;

Spoiler

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ester-united-midfielder-ander-herrera-9087438

Manchester United midfielder Ander Herrera: Paul Scholes was a one off

• 10:23, 21 April 2015
• By Samuel Luckhurst

Ander Herrera is flattered by Paul Scholes comparisons but the Man Utd midfielder is keen on being his own man

Herrera has been compared to United legend Scholes
Ander Herrera has generated comparisons with Paul Scholes in recent months, however the Manchester United midfielder has described the Reds legend as a 'one off'.
Herrera has scored seven goals this season and could become the first United midfielder to hit double-figures since Scholes in the 2004-05 season.

The 25-year-old is a firm fans' favourite already, although he dismissed suggestions he could be the 'new Scholes' as premature.
"There will never be a new Scholes - he's a one off," the Spaniard wrote on his Facebook page.
Herrera told the M.E.N. in February he was determined to become as important to the United fans as Scholes was.
"Paul Scholes is maybe the biggest midfielder in the United history," Herrera beamed.

Herrera celebrates his seventh United goal against Aston Villa


"I want to be Ander Herrera, I want to learn things from Paul Scholes, things from Michael Carrick, things from Wayne Rooney, I wish one day... I wish one day I can be so important for the fans, but I have to work very, very hard for that."
Herrera added the favourite of his seven United strikes for was the FA Cup third round winner at Yeovil in February.
The Basque has also netted against Queens Park Rangers, Leicester, Preston, Swansea and Aston Villa.

Great attitude from the lad, fingers crossed he can fulfil his potential and become a really important player for us over the next 5+ years.

 

[rover]

opinion without "farcks" are just empty words. let's check out the "farcks":

herrera running along a path bearing 310'. herrera already had the ball at this moment thus he was having privilege to the clear space in front of him. cahill cut in from right his right hand side, bearing 225', a yard away perpendicular to the path of herrera. watch out where was the right foot of herrera:

Spoiler

cahill cut in to the herrara's path. cahill had with his right leg intruded into the space belonged to the herrera's. watched again the right foot of herrera. it's still touching the ground. this means at this moment herrera DIDN'T put his foot on to the cahill's. he's just keeping his course of direction of running:

Spoiler

now the collision happened. cahill had his right knee collided with the herrera's right knee:

Spoiler

the definition i give out for diving is:

pretended something had happened but indeed it didn't and still acted on it

just feel free to give yours.


how anyone can tell herrera put his foot onto cahill? the right foot of cahill intruded into the space belonged to the herrera's. this is 100% a foul from cahill. you might say herrera can continue the play but he choose to fall down. but this is not a dive.

 

[Walrus]

the definition i give out for diving is:

pretended something had happened but indeed it didn't and still acted on it

just feel free to give yours.

I said previously, but yes that is probably the definition of a dive by the letter of the law, however in practice it can be expanded.

If an attacker deliberately makes contact with a defender, for the pure aim of drawing a foul/penalty, then is that fair play?
If an attacker goes down very easily from minimal contact when they could easily have stayed on their feet, is that fair play?

It doesnt matter whether you call it a dive or something else, for me the answer to both questions is "no" and both should be punishable by a yellow card.

In the Herrera incident, freeze frames do not show what happened. In realtime, and when watching the replays, it was obvious that Herrera left his trailing foot dangling and stuck it out a bit in order to make contact with Cahill - and as soon as he felt the contact he threw himself to the ground in quite an unnatural fashion. It wasnt a foul, it wasnt a penalty, Herrera deserved to be booked - just accept it and move on.

 

[Roosney]

I think it was a foul but Herrera made the mistake by trailing his leg. We'll never know what the ref might have called if he hadn't done so. Anyway, spilt milk this.

 

[Mindhunter]

opinion without "farcks" are just empty words. let's check out the "farcks":

herrera running along a path bearing 310'. herrera already had the ball at this moment thus he was having privilege to the clear space in front of him. cahill cut in from right his right hand side, bearing 225', a yard away perpendicular to the path of herrera. watch out where was the right foot of herrera:


cahill cut in to the herrara's path. cahill had with his right leg intruded into the space belonged to the herrera's. watched again the right foot of herrera. it's still touching the ground. this means at this moment herrera DIDN'T put his foot on to the cahill's. he's just keeping his course of direction of running:


now the collision happened. cahill had his right knee collided with the herrera's right knee:



the definition i give out for diving is:

pretended something had happened but indeed it didn't and still acted on it

just feel free to give yours.


how anyone can tell herrera put his foot onto cahill? the right foot of cahill intruded into the space belonged to the herrera's. this is 100% a foul from cahill. you might say herrera can continue the play but he choose to fall down. but this is not a dive.

If you have seen the match and the replay, it was clear as ice that Herrera engineered the contact deliberately when he could have easily avoided it and got booked for it. It is understandable though since Chelsea were playing very compact and narrow and we rarely had any chances in spite of 70% possession. I hope he doesn't make a habit out of it. It is extremely difficult to respect such professionals to cheat on the field.

 

[bishblaize]

I said previously, but yes that is probably the definition of a dive by the letter of the law, however in practice it can be expanded.

If an attacker deliberately makes contact with a defender, for the pure aim of drawing a foul/penalty, then is that fair play?
If an attacker goes down very easily from minimal contact when they could easily have stayed on their feet, is that fair play?

It doesnt matter whether you call it a dive or something else, for me the answer to both questions is "no" and both should be punishable by a yellow card.

In the Herrera incident, freeze frames do not show what happened. In realtime, and when watching the replays, it was obvious that Herrera left his trailing foot dangling and stuck it out a bit in order to make contact with Cahill - and as soon as he felt the contact he threw himself to the ground in quite an unnatural fashion. It wasnt a foul, it wasnt a penalty, Herrera deserved to be booked - just accept it and move on.

To be honest I'm surprised this is a debate, its clearly a dive.

 

[rover]

when cahill intruded into the herrera's path, the herrera's feet was STILL ON THE GROUND. this clearly means herrera DIDN'T put his leg onto cahill. again, the decision over the incident entirely depends on whether if there was a foul commited by cahill and this is 100% clear he did. all these snapshots just happened within a single second a video play could even mislead you to a wrong perception. this can only be clear by display in slow motion.

you can't judge an action just because of a MINIMAL contact occurs. what is a MINIMAL contact? who's to judge?

in this particular case, cahill can never touch herrera at all unless he can make a clean tackle just aimed at the ball. this is a common of worldwide football. to protect ball possession is the only way to encourage for playing good football.

 

[rover]

@Subho611 ,

why herrera needed to take initiative to "avoid" the contact? this is his path and his right to run in. this is the intruder's interest needed to be very careful to avoid a contact being made in order to avoid a foul on the person who have the ball in possesion

 

[Nighteyes]

This is a ridiculous statement and to me, just proof of the amount of bias that you and other posters show towards Herrera. I can pretty much guarantee you wouldnt be say that if Young, Fellaini or Januzaj had done it.

Personally, I couldn't give 2 shits about diving but you're spot on. The stick someone gets for diving is directly proportional to how well they are liked. Young got loads of abuse for diving. Probably from the same people who fawned over Ronaldo.

 

[gerdm07]

i'm afraid there are too many people are wrong about "diving".

to decide whether if there is a penalty or not the main concern is whether if a defender do make a foul on an attacker inside the box. to decide there is a foul or not the main concern is whether if what the defender do is legal. what the attacker do is basically irrelevant to decide if the defender has made a foul on him or not

so the whole issue is, did the tackle cahill made on herrera legal? and the answer is certainly not.

cahill cut in the path of herrera when herrera already had the ball. cahill deliberately had his right foot intruded into the space where herrera had already occupied. herrera didn't run on cahill, herrera run into space, and then both the right legs of the both players collided and herrera fell down. so this is a foul since cahill illegally intruded into the space herrera had already occupied and made a contact, hence this is a penalty.

the action of herrera really doesn't matter on what cahill had done. you may wonder why some players falling down so easily since they could have carried on playing. but answering the question whether if this is a penalty you only need to decide if cahill did make a foul on herrera and this is definitely a yes.

just put the location of contact outside the box. how often do you think a ref would award a free kick? 8/9 out of 10

LOL. He initiated the contact by extending his leg, end of story. What's funny is I know if an opponent had done the same thing and gotten the PK you would be incensed. It's hard, but try to objective.

 

[Cassidy]

I think it was a foul but Herrera made the mistake by trailing his leg. We'll never know what the ref might have called if he hadn't done so. Anyway, spilt milk this.

This is pretty much my view, Herrera moved his leg into Cahill and went down, had he not done that he would have actually been fouled anyway. So its a dive, but would have been very interesting if he didn't try to buy the pen

 

[Brwned]

This is a ridiculous statement and to me, just proof of the amount of bias that you and other posters show towards Herrera. I can pretty much guarantee you wouldnt be say that if Young, Fellaini or Januzaj had done it.

I said this about Suárez not too long ago:

I don't mind the diving all that much myself. Sometimes I even admire the craftiness of it. All that rolling around and screaming out in pain though, that winds me up no end. I think we've only ever had one player who did this on occasion and that's Nani, and I genuinely think he has a ridiculously low pain threshold. He's just a bit of a wimp. No-one at Arsenal does it, no-one at City, no-one at Spurs...I just don't see how anyone could defend it. It's the most embarrassing thing in football.

 

[Mindhunter]

@Subho611 ,

why herrera needed to take initiative to "avoid" the contact? this is his path and his right to run in. this is the intruder's interest needed to be very careful to avoid a contact being made in order to avoid a foul on the person who have the ball in possesion

If you look at it carefully, he did stop marginally so as not to get in his path. Herrara deliberately stuck his leg out to be caught and then immediately appealed. It was pretty obvious what he was trying to do to be honest.

 

[Walrus]

I said this about Suárez not too long ago:

Well at least you are consistently wrong then

I do agree on that though, that feigning injury and acting like you have been shot is the worst and most embarrassing thing. What was that situation the other week in one of our games (City I think - was it Demichelis?) when their player was rolling around in agony, and got immediately back up when the ref stopped play. Even the ref just shook his head and gave the guy a look of pure disdain.

edit: Found it!

 

[Welsh Wonder]

opinion without "farcks" are just empty words. let's check out the "farcks":

herrera running along a path bearing 310'. herrera already had the ball at this moment thus he was having privilege to the clear space in front of him. cahill cut in from right his right hand side, bearing 225', a yard away perpendicular to the path of herrera. watch out where was the right foot of herrera:

Spoiler

I've got nothing to add to the debate but can I just say this is the best paragraph ever. Such mathematical precision.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

opinion without "farcks" are just empty words. let's check out the "farcks":

herrera running along a path bearing 310'. herrera already had the ball at this moment thus he was having privilege to the clear space in front of him. cahill cut in from right his right hand side, bearing 225', a yard away perpendicular to the path of herrera. watch out where was the right foot of herrera:

Spoiler

cahill cut in to the herrara's path. cahill had with his right leg intruded into the space belonged to the herrera's. watched again the right foot of herrera. it's still touching the ground. this means at this moment herrera DIDN'T put his foot on to the cahill's. he's just keeping his course of direction of running:

Spoiler

now the collision happened. cahill had his right knee collided with the herrera's right knee:

Spoiler

the definition i give out for diving is:

pretended something had happened but indeed it didn't and still acted on it

just feel free to give yours.


how anyone can tell herrera put his foot onto cahill? the right foot of cahill intruded into the space belonged to the herrera's. this is 100% a foul from cahill. you might say herrera can continue the play but he choose to fall down. but this is not a dive.

That's one of the strangest posts I've ever seen on here. Amazing.

It was definitely a dive, though. You should check out some of the footage if you get a chance. Those geniuses at sky sports have found a way to create moving images out of all those still photos you found. Makes it so much easier to work out what's going on.

 

[RedRover]

If you have seen the match and the replay, it was clear as ice that Herrera engineered the contact deliberately when he could have easily avoided it and got booked for it. It is understandable though since Chelsea were playing very compact and narrow and we rarely had any chances in spite of 70% possession. I hope he doesn't make a habit out of it. It is extremely difficult to respect such professionals to cheat on the field.

This is spot on. Left the leg trailing to try and draw the foul, didnt and went down anyway.

You do see them given but you shouldnt. I guess travelling at speed then a referee can be caught out.

 

[ivaldo]

Well at least you are consistently wrong then

I do agree on that though, that feigning injury and acting like you have been shot is the worst and most embarrassing thing. What was that situation the other week in one of our games (City I think - was it Demichelis?) when their player was rolling around in agony, and got immediately back up when the ref stopped play. Even the ref just shook his head and gave the guy a look of pure disdain.

edit: Found it!

I think you owe @Brwned an apology.

 

[rover]

@Pogue Mahone,
i really don't need those idiots in the television to tell me what had happened. just watch out the first two pics, herrera was still stepping his right foot on the ground. this means he didn't change his position or his course of direction when cahill cut in and made the contact. rather, the subsequent actions of herrera after the contact made let him looked like he's completing acting on it.

 

[bosnian_red]

@Pogue Mahone,
i really don't need those idiots in the television to tell me what had happened. just watch out the first two pics, herrera was still stepping his right foot on the ground. this means he didn't change his position or his course of direction when cahill cut in and made the contact. rather, the subsequent actions of herrera after the contact made let him looked like he's completing acting on it.

Look at the replays from one of the angles you can see how cahill stops and herrera moves his leg out to put it between Cahills legs. Still images isn't the best way to look at things

 

[rover]

for the whole incident the critical moment is the moment when the contact was made, and important moments are the events happened before the critical moment since they are essential to decide whether if a foul was made.

at the critical moment herrera was keeping his path and holding his position, as proved by the 1st & the 2nd pics that his right foot was still stepping on the same ground between the two moments. this proved herrera didn't run into anything but his own path before the contact was made

before the critical moment herrera kept running into his path after he took possession of the ball. cahill was cutting in perpendicular to the running path of herrera. cahill was NOT holding his position but running into herrera until the critical moment occured.

what happened AFTER the critical moment are basically irrelevant to the incident. and what most people perceived herrera was diving because of those actions happened AFTER the critical moment.

all these motions happened withing a split of second. a sequence of continuous events as displayed in the video can cause into a delusion to focus in what happened after the critical moment since those actions are more exaggerated. the only way to have it reviewed thoroughly is to break it down into discrete pictures to find out exactly what happened within such a short moment of time.

just like offside (or goalline technology). you may not be able to tell this is onside or offside if just reviewing the video because this is out of our brain's processing capability. sometimes you have no choice but to break it down into a few shots and to check it out one by one, back and forth, so you can find out where is the critical moment. and then compare the critical moment to what had happened before or after

i think i'm a bit critical to herrera here. my first two posts here in some people's eyes maybe i was trying to trolling him. now it deems i'm his biggest defender.

 

[Zoo]

 

[rover]

Look at the replays from one of the angles you can see how cahill stops and herrera moves his leg out to put it between Cahills legs. Still images isn't the best way to look at things

probably you haven't watched the first two pictures i attached earlier.

watch the right football of herrera between the two moments that it stick on the ground. how cahill could have hold still and collided with herrera when herrera kept his right foot on the ground. any suggestion?

 

[Devil may care]

Fairly anonymous today, didn't seemed to get caught between whether to stick close to Blind or get closer to the forwards.

 

[Kag]

I thought he was the only player that looked like taking the initiative with any kind of thought process behind what he was trying to do.

Not one of his better games, but our best player aside from Smalling.

 

[thejtrain]

Good and bad. A bit anonymous too. He usually thrives against teams pressing, but today he was struggling at the start of the game to counter the pressing.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

Fairly anonymous today, didn't seemed to get caught between whether to stick close to Blind or get closer to the forwards.

That is a good point. He was the only one who tries anything, but Blind was awful, so you end up caught between two stools.

 

[izec]

Thought he was ok too. Alongside Smalling and Shaw the only player who showed up. The only annyoing thing is that he protests to the ref instead of playing on.

 

[Ekeke]

He was very subdued today, Everton made it difficult for us to play through the middle and that restricted both he and Fellaini. But a lot of teams are going to do that and we have to find a way to rise above it. Unfortunately Ander, like Fellaini and the rest did not manage to find that extra bit of class to make it happen.

 

[Kazi]

He was OK, nothing special. Thought he was going to bury that chance in the first half where he was left of goal. Should have just smashed it.

 

[The White Pele]

Thought he was sloppy in possession today

 

[Amar__]

Only one who was trying something, and probably the best player from our midfielders/attackers. That's not saying much though, but he doesn't deserve any criticism for today.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

Only one who was trying something, and probably the best player from our midfielders/attackers. That's not saying much though, but he doesn't deserve any criticism for today.

He can't do it all on his own. Them cheating to get Fellaini booked didn't help. My god we miss Carrick.

 

[m1y2]

Best player was Smalling by some distance, then Shaw and Herrera, maybe Mata and Young weren't as awful as the rest of the team. Herrera did okay today but he had struggling Fellaini and Blind providing him any kind of service rooney and van persie in midfield... no comment, desperately need world class defensive midfielder who can play no6 well asi his primary position - Schneiderlin... Then we will be okay

 

[bosnian_red]

Thought he was the only one at a normal level today really. Tried hard but not too much movement in front.