VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

It's frustrating but it is now allowed to block keepers. The fact that we are surprised by this every time is whats annoying.
 
Cunha shouldn't be fecking playing by the way. Guarantee they held off on the ban so he could have this masterclass against us and will ban him for 8 games tomorrow.
 
Amorim won’t get that marginal gains in his team winning by not talking about the ref being poor.

This referee allows physical play but then gives yellow cards so easily. Mind boggling.
 
feck me onana is so so weak.its pathetic.
Never a foul he has HAS to shove the player in front of him out of the way.
The player behind him is not obliged to move.
 
I geuss goalkeepers need to change their behaviour, the need to try to free themselves and fall to the ground as soon as one of the attackers moves to impede him. Then VAR has a case.
 
Hammondo said:
So by my understanding, by these rules, not a foul.
Click to expand...
quote 1
Standing in one place doesn't meet the definition of impeding in Law 12:


Impeding the progress of an opponent without contact
Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.
Click to expand...

to which theres one answer

Even if you don't want to call it impeding, in my opinion you can call it as holding. Up till 2016, the laws contained the following definition of holding:

Holding an opponent includes the act of preventing him from moving past or around using the hands, the arms or the body.
Click to expand...
I know that definition isn't there any more but I think it's still accurate (and was only removed, along with various other things, as part of the effort to shorten the laws, rather than because it was invalid).
Click to expand...
 
Hammondo said:
But what would be the rule?
Click to expand...
It's quite clearly spelled out in law 12:

An indirect free kick is awarded if a player:
  • impedes the progress of an opponent without any contact being made
IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF AN OPPONENT WITHOUT CONTACT

Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
 
This season we've seen so many goalkeepers being interfered with and the refs are allowing it. It's frankly appalling that they are allowing these tactics to thrive in the Premier League. Base football
 
Thom Merrilin said:
It's quite clearly spelled out in law 12:

An indirect free kick is awarded if a player:
  • impedes the progress of an opponent without any contact being made
IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF AN OPPONENT WITHOUT CONTACT

Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
Click to expand...
They didn't do that, they started in those positions.
 
Hammondo said:
Not really, because they just stood there, they don't need to get out of the way of the keeper, that's not what the rule is saying.
Click to expand...
As I said, it's difficult because it seems to have become a loophole. I'm pretty sure that tool of blatantly crowding the gk is being escalated at the moment, am I wrong? And I think the refs must start to adress it, by clarifying the rules.
 
Why is anyone suprised about referees and us? Stonewall freekick but as always our club officials will stay silent.
 
FortunaUtd said:
As I said, it's difficult because it seems to have become a loophole. I'm pretty sure that tool of blatantly crowding the gk is being escalated at the moment, am I wrong? And I think the ref must start to adress it.
Click to expand...
Yea but I imagine the problem is writing a good rule for it, a lot of situations to account for.
 
FortunaUtd said:
Absolutely. But it can't go on like this, it's kind of ridiculous. But then again, goalkeepers and defenders need to find a reaction to it too.
Click to expand...
Arsenal did the same to us, keeper was surrounded by players from both teams and he couldn't move.
 
90 + 5min said:
Why is anyone suprised about referees and us? Stonewall freekick but as always our club officials will stay silent.
Click to expand...

I was really disappointed that Amorim came out last week saying he won't ever criticise refs. He's being naive if he thinks that will get us fair treatment for being nice.
 
FortunaUtd said:
Absolutely. But it can't go on like this, it's kind of ridiculous. But then again, goalkeepers and defenders need to find a reaction to it too.
Click to expand...

A lot of teams will try to put a player right near their goalkeeper who will then push out any defender and create space. A lot of it is just bodying the opponent.

If you look at the replay of this goal, almost all the Wolves attackers are goal side of the United defenders, its a weird defensive setup. This lets Doherty outmuscle Ugarte to get close to Onana's back and it also means that Mazroui has no hope of heading the ball away at the far post because there's a Wolves player between him and the goal. I don't know if the setup was affected by only having 10 men but it just doesn't seem like a good system for countering this kind of tactic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.