Last Man Fouls to no longer carry Red Card - Proposal to IFAB

Don't Kill Bill · 13th February 2010, 10:07

As long as the rule change is only with regard to offenses inside the box then I think it will be a good one. I think about decisions like the one on PIG against Portsmouth in the FA cup.

Tumbling-Dice · 13th February 2010, 10:08

Waahey, another grey area so the referees can make it up as they go along.

kietotheworld · 13th February 2010, 10:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone

Good point. That would have to remain an automatic red. The one occasion where a penalty represents a reduced likelihood of scoring. I don't agree about their being more risky penalties early in the game. A penalty is never a risk worth taking. How often do strikers get the opportunity to shoot at the goal from 12 yards out, with the keeper on his line and all the time in the world to take a shot?

As far as the rule being cut and dried, I guess it would mean that if a penalty is awarded then it's only a red card if the challenge merits it in it's own right (e.g. dangerous play etc) That wouldn't be too hard to implement.

There are certain players who you would rather stop by holding them back by their shirt and let them have a penalty than give them a one-on-one, eg. Defoe considering his record on penalties, if he was through on goal against United Vidic would be better off pulling the shirt of his back, getting a booking letting van der Sar face the penalty rather that giving Defoe the one-on-one, whereas if it happened today, he'd be better off letting him go for it.

esmufc12 · 13th February 2010, 10:36

Tactical fouls, part and parcel of the game.

Pogue Mahone · 13th February 2010, 10:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by kietotheworld

There are certain players who you would rather stop by holding them back by their shirt and let them have a penalty than give them a one-on-one, eg. Defoe considering his record on penalties, if he was through on goal against United Vidic would be better off pulling the shirt of his back, getting a booking letting van der Sar face the penalty rather that giving Defoe the one-on-one, whereas if it happened today, he'd be better off letting him go for it.

The rules shouldn't be based around certain individuals being shit at penalties. Defoe shouldn't take them if he can't convert them.

The fact remains that there's a much higher % of penalties converted than there is chances in open play. Hence, it's almost never a good idea to deliberately concede a penalty (apart from handling the ball on the line, that is)

Sunny Jim · 13th February 2010, 11:27

Football is about scoring goals. denying a clear sccoring opportunity in an "illegal" manner beats the purpose of playing the game. IMO harsh penelties (peno, sending off, suspension) are fair.

on the other hand- are these mongs in FIFA intrested in making the game more attactive? didn't they moan a while ago that there are less goals scored? imo introducing this change will effect in a smaller number of goals scored from an open play.

kietotheworld · 13th February 2010, 11:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by esmufc10

Tactical fouls, part and parcel of the game.

Never join a football association.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone

The rules shouldn't be based around certain individuals being shit at penalties. Defoe shouldn't take them if he can't convert them.

The fact remains that there's a much higher % of penalties converted than there is chances in open play. Hence, it's almost never a good idea to deliberately concede a penalty (apart from handling the ball on the line, that is)

It was just an example. Ideally the rule as it is would prevent players from making challenges which risk unfairly denying a goalscoring opportunity.

Pogue Mahone · 13th February 2010, 11:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by kietotheworld

Never join a football association.

It was just an example. Ideally the rule as it is would prevent players from making challenges which risk unfairly denying a goalscoring opportunity.

It does.

The deterrent isn't as strong as it could be for professional fouls outside the box though, which is why they keeps happening.

Tell me, when was the last time you saw a defender "do a Solskjaer" inside the box?

kietotheworld · 13th February 2010, 12:41

Closest I can think of is this, one minute 34 seconds in. High risk of giving away a penalty to try prevent a one-on-one, you'd see a lot more of this sort of tackle if players wouldn't be facing a red card and suspension for it.

acnumber9 · 13th February 2010, 13:06

If a striker has an emtpy net it gives a defender carte blanche to just pull him
down and hope he misses the penalty. Not really a fitting punishment in that case.

kouroux · 13th February 2010, 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by AgainstAllOdds

Why is it too much? If you make a deliberate foul and deny a goalscoring opportunity (which seen in context is 'cheating'), then you shouldn't be allowed to play anymore.

There is a confusion between denying a goalscoring opportunity and being the last man and tackling the attacker.They're not always the same thing.
I've seen plenty of people just because a defender is the last man and makes a foul he should be sent off whereas it's not part of the law.

kietotheworld · 13th February 2010, 13:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by kouroux

There is a confusion between denying a goalscoring opportunity and being the last man and tackling the attacker.They're not always the same thing.
I've seen plenty of people just because a defender is the last man and makes a foul he should be sent off whereas it's not part of the law.

I believe it's part of the directives given to referees. The attacker must also be moving in the direction of the goal according to the directives, although you won't find that anywhere in the laws.

Spammy · 13th February 2010, 13:16

Slightly related topic, and you're all probably going to think I'm crazy, I myself, hate constant changes to the rules, especially major ones. But for a while I've been thinking about how gay it is when there is a really tight, tactical game that is settled by a soft/debatable penalty that took place right in the corner of the penalty area (some 20 yards away from goal). Perhaps the game would benefit from having a smaller penalty area, or a smaller designated area within the current 18 yard box. A central box measuring up to the 16.5 yards in front of goal and only about 10 yards either side of the posts would be the new 'penalty' area, and the rest of the box could either be removed completely or just be a free kick with a limited or no wall allowed.

Slightly wacky I know, but it would stop some those game ruining moments.

kouroux · 13th February 2010, 13:19

The problem with all these laws and directives football is becoming complex, specially for referees who are expected to make important decisions in short periods of time.The not-so-new offside rule is an example of it, how a referee is supposed to see if a player or several are influencing the action or not in split seconds ?
FIFA claim referees should be more respected and they don't do anything to make their jobs easier

Pogue Mahone · 13th February 2010, 13:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by acnumber9

If a striker has an emtpy net it gives a defender carte blanche to just pull him
down and hope he misses the penalty. Not really a fitting punishment in that case.

You don't think defenders would do that already, if they had the chance to?

Murphman · 13th February 2010, 13:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grinner

On a different note I reckon a dive by a forward in the penalty box should be punished by a yellow card and a free kick for the defending team in the opponents penalty box in the same location as the dive. I reckon that'd cut out the dives sharpish.

I reckon it would cause a fucking riot.

acnumber9 · 13th February 2010, 14:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone

You don't think defenders would do that already, if they had the chance to?

Yeah but at least they would be punished for it. They have something to lose. If the rules chane they wouldn't and the attacking team would be the ones punished. It's not broken so no need to fix it.

gaffs · 13th February 2010, 14:34

Keep it as it is.

There are too many different scenarios.

When players stop a goal by handballing, they deserve a red and a pen.

zain · 13th February 2010, 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by kietotheworld

That's cheating, pure and simple.

It is NOT cheating tbh..Not according to me at least, here's why.

he wasn't conning or deceiving anyone, neither was he gaining an unfair advantage...

He knew what he was doing, he knew the repercussions, it was a calculated professional foul.....

There was no way he thought he was going to get away with it, and he started walking off as soon as he did it.

Raven Blade · 13th February 2010, 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by kouroux

The problem with all these laws and directives football is becoming complex, specially for referees who are expected to make important decisions in short periods of time.The not-so-new offside rule is an example of it, how a referee is supposed to see if a player or several are influencing the action or not in split seconds ?
FIFA claim referees should be more respected and they don't do anything to make their jobs easier

Now this I agree with. That's what FIFA should be focusing their efforts on.

evra · 14th January 2012, 15:25

Has this law come into force then?

Snow · 14th January 2012, 15:49

Wasn't a clear opportunity. He would have to take as shot from a tight angle. Never a red.

evra · 14th January 2012, 15:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow

Wasn't a clear opportunity. He would have to take as shot from a tight angle. Never a red.

The angle wasn't that tight, I'd say it was a clear opportunity.

Solius · 14th January 2012, 15:52

I don't even think he had any intention of shooting. Looked like he was waiting for the foul.

Randall Flagg · 14th January 2012, 15:53

It was 100% a goalscoring chance. He was through on goal!

Knight very lucky to be on the pitch

Orton · 14th January 2012, 15:54

Ah come on if that's not a clear goal scoring oppurtunity then what is? He was in on goal and it shouldn't matter if he was thinking about passing or waiting for a foul.

Snow · 14th January 2012, 16:00

Was a goal scoring chance but not a clear one like a penalty is. He was still under pressure from Zat, he was coming in from the sides, had to be on full pelt and Wheater was coming in from the left. He wouldn't have been able to take a touch inwards. He'd probably had taken it a bit outwards like most footballers do to be on the safe side.

The chance that Welbeck missed at the beginning was a clearer opportunity.

Sylar · 14th January 2012, 16:02

I think if its outside the box, it should be a red. Inside, well you get the pen so your goal scoring opportunity is still there, so unless its violent conduct, a yellow isnt that bad.

Depends on situation but obv needs consistency which you wont get from refs.

Snow · 14th January 2012, 17:35

Seeing it again now. According to the rules it was a red. True. But Walton doesn't often play by the rules.
I'm happy that he didn't got sent off because I don't think the rule is fair. But the rules are still there and so he should have been off.

RedCafe.net

The Leading Manchester United Forum

Member's Login

Last Man Fouls to no longer carry Red Card - Proposal to IFAB

Latest Forum Topics

Jump to Forum

Not yet registered?

13th February 2010, 10:07	#41 (permalink)
Don't Kill Bill Reserve Team Player Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 2,588	As long as the rule change is only with regard to offenses inside the box then I think it will be a good one. I think about decisions like the one on PIG against Portsmouth in the FA cup.

13th February 2010, 10:08	#42 (permalink)
Tumbling-Dice Caf Nostradamus Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Roy Keane has five kids, partly because of his Irish Catholic background, and partly because someone told him that Patrick Vieira has four. Posts: 18,820	Waahey, another grey area so the referees can make it up as they go along.

13th February 2010, 10:36	#44 (permalink)
esmufc12 Unclean Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,477	Tactical fouls, part and parcel of the game.

13th February 2010, 11:27	#46 (permalink)
Sunny Jim First Team Regular Join Date: May 2007 Location: Warsaw...that's too far away from Edinburgh... Posts: 14,700	Football is about scoring goals. denying a clear sccoring opportunity in an "illegal" manner beats the purpose of playing the game. IMO harsh penelties (peno, sending off, suspension) are fair. on the other hand- are these mongs in FIFA intrested in making the game more attactive? didn't they moan a while ago that there are less goals scored? imo introducing this change will effect in a smaller number of goals scored from an open play.

13th February 2010, 12:41	#49 (permalink)
kietotheworld Platini's mum Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Machete's Chop Shop Posts: 11,602	Closest I can think of is this, one minute 34 seconds in. High risk of giving away a penalty to try prevent a one-on-one, you'd see a lot more of this sort of tackle if players wouldn't be facing a red card and suspension for it.

13th February 2010, 13:06	#50 (permalink)
acnumber9 Reserve Team Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 3,225	If a striker has an emtpy net it gives a defender carte blanche to just pull him down and hope he misses the penalty. Not really a fitting punishment in that case.

13th February 2010, 13:16	#53 (permalink)
Spammy Being watched; will learn to post in the correct forum Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Gloves are worn for traction primarily. Someone like Evra needs them for good throw-ins when it's raining or snowing or the ball is damp. Kaka, might wear them because he get's fouled a lot. Scraping and cutting his hands on frozen pitches Posts: 27,288	Slightly related topic, and you're all probably going to think I'm crazy, I myself, hate constant changes to the rules, especially major ones. But for a while I've been thinking about how gay it is when there is a really tight, tactical game that is settled by a soft/debatable penalty that took place right in the corner of the penalty area (some 20 yards away from goal). Perhaps the game would benefit from having a smaller penalty area, or a smaller designated area within the current 18 yard box. A central box measuring up to the 16.5 yards in front of goal and only about 10 yards either side of the posts would be the new 'penalty' area, and the rest of the box could either be removed completely or just be a free kick with a limited or no wall allowed. Slightly wacky I know, but it would stop some those game ruining moments.

13th February 2010, 13:19	#54 (permalink)
kouroux First Team Regular Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Djibouti (La terre des braves) Posts: 25,550	The problem with all these laws and directives football is becoming complex, specially for referees who are expected to make important decisions in short periods of time.The not-so-new offside rule is an example of it, how a referee is supposed to see if a player or several are influencing the action or not in split seconds ? FIFA claim referees should be more respected and they don't do anything to make their jobs easier

13th February 2010, 14:34	#58 (permalink)
gaffs First Team Sub Join Date: May 2007 Location: Moscow 08, Rome 09, London 11 Posts: 9,994	Keep it as it is. There are too many different scenarios. When players stop a goal by handballing, they deserve a red and a pen.

14th January 2012, 15:25	#61 (permalink)
evra First Team Sub Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: If every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right. Posts: 8,037	Has this law come into force then?

14th January 2012, 15:49	#62 (permalink)
Snow First Team Regular Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: I like turtles Posts: 12,319	Wasn't a clear opportunity. He would have to take as shot from a tight angle. Never a red.

14th January 2012, 15:52	#64 (permalink)
Solius Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Fucker shits Posts: 40,587	I don't even think he had any intention of shooting. Looked like he was waiting for the foul.

14th January 2012, 15:53	#65 (permalink)
Randall Flagg Scarlett woman ( Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn ) Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 16,681	It was 100% a goalscoring chance. He was through on goal! Knight very lucky to be on the pitch

14th January 2012, 15:54	#66 (permalink)
Orton Ati-virus, keeps missing the n button Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: bonnie wee Scotland Posts: 7,208	Ah come on if that's not a clear goal scoring oppurtunity then what is? He was in on goal and it shouldn't matter if he was thinking about passing or waiting for a foul.

14th January 2012, 16:00	#67 (permalink)
Snow First Team Regular Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: I like turtles Posts: 12,319	Was a goal scoring chance but not a clear one like a penalty is. He was still under pressure from Zat, he was coming in from the sides, had to be on full pelt and Wheater was coming in from the left. He wouldn't have been able to take a touch inwards. He'd probably had taken it a bit outwards like most footballers do to be on the safe side. The chance that Welbeck missed at the beginning was a clearer opportunity.

14th January 2012, 16:02	#68 (permalink)
Sylar Reserve Team Player Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 3,818	I think if its outside the box, it should be a red. Inside, well you get the pen so your goal scoring opportunity is still there, so unless its violent conduct, a yellow isnt that bad. Depends on situation but obv needs consistency which you wont get from refs.

14th January 2012, 17:35	#69 (permalink)
Snow First Team Regular Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: I like turtles Posts: 12,319	Seeing it again now. According to the rules it was a red. True. But Walton doesn't often play by the rules. I'm happy that he didn't got sent off because I don't think the rule is fair. But the rules are still there and so he should have been off.