And it should be emphasised that this is quite literally cheating. It seems to be accepted as part and parcel of football but it is a deliberate violation of the rules to gain advantage - the very definition of cheating.
'Tactical' fouls
- Thread starter matherto
- Start date
They get more ire/attention because fans see them as preventing high press teams from getting got at. But I am not sure that should be a factor in how they are perceived by the authorities.
Maybe a sin bin should be implemented for 10 fouls, no matter what kind they are?
Yep.
There is a definite bias from referees.
I don’t think anyone will forget the United captain being told ‘One more foul on Eden Hazard and I’ll be sending that player off’.
Don’t recall United ever getting same protection.
Consistency is the most infuriating part of all this. Not one yellow for City in that first half, with quite a few obvious yellows.
I don’t think anyone will forget the United captain being told ‘One more foul on Eden Hazard and I’ll be sending that player off’.
Don’t recall United ever getting same protection.
Consistency is the most infuriating part of all this. Not one yellow for City in that first half, with quite a few obvious yellows.
Not when your team has commited lots of players forward and you're about to be caught on the break. It's obvious to everybody in the ground except for the officials!
It's a different topic. Some teams have a tendancy to foul one specific player many times, with different players. So you can't book anyone because it's never the same player and the ref can't single out one opponent saying "it's your 4th foul, you deserve a yellow". The exact same thing happens with Neymar in France, he'll get fouled 5-6 times in 15mmn by different players. So at one point, to avoid one dominant player to be fouled 15 times without anyone receiving a yellow, they HAVE to say "ok, whoever fouls this player next will receive a card". Otherwise it's too easy, lets say you need 4 armless fouls to get a card, it means that Messi, Neymar, Hazard or whoever can be fouled 40 times before anyone gets a card.
You’re conflating the issue that refs aren’t that hot on tactical fouling with a computer taking over the ref’s job. It’s not one or the other.
In the past refereeing has adapted to tactical trends. We saw that in the early 90s with the pass back rule and greater punishment for the reckless fouls that barely raised an eyebrow a few years earlier. Today elite possession-based clubs playing so high up the park is almost unprecedented. Their systematic use of high early fouls to prevent dangerous breaks needs some consideration by the law-makers as it’s a new scenario where the old conventions (non-reckless foul a long way from goal doesn’t get a yellow) don’t apply. All it takes to resolve is some clear guidance and training to referees to more easily recognise what is a tactical foul. No need for VAR to get involved. And we both want a game that flows with fewer stoppages. Punishing tactical fouling will actually help to keep the game moving because players won’t so readily commit momentum-killing fouls.
I agree with all of that but its not as clear cut of it being a tactical foul or was it a genuine attempt to get the ball, do you want every foul given on a counterattacking team to be a yellow? Its a tough call for a ref to say that was an intentional attempt to foul a player without going and reviewing the incident, given how innocuous some of these are. Again what we see and what the ref sees is totally different things depending on the referees position on the pitch. I would say most referees are aware of this but they are supposed to be making a judgment call in seconds having only one chance to see the incident.
This is what drives the anger I think.
What do you mean?
The anger about tactical fouls comes from how effective they are at preventing counter attacks. I have never heard this much angst about teams that foul at a higher level, but do it in a more conventional manner.
I hate both kinds, because they both stop the flow of the game. Niggly fouls that are aimed to prevent any sort of football actually happening can ruin a game.
And this is not a case of hating an otherwise completely legitimate tactic, such as simply dropping deep and defending in numbers. That is not pretty but well within the rules. These kinds of fouls are deliberate violations of the rules, aka cheating.
We're on the same page then. I'm not a fan of fouling, full stop.
I do like the idea of a sin bin where after you accumulate enough fouls someone sits out for a while
Agreed.
Yeah, I wouldn't mind that. Worth trying it out in some competition like the Confederations Cup or something. Does that still exist?
Bring in a sin bin for 10 mins for a 'tactical foul'
Certain team who lack quality might only get the chance to attack the likes of City 3 or 4 times in a game and then find a City player will take a booking on 2 of those occasions to stop the attack.
Certain team who lack quality might only get the chance to attack the likes of City 3 or 4 times in a game and then find a City player will take a booking on 2 of those occasions to stop the attack.
Okay how about these ideas.
1, the team on the recieving end of a tactical foul gets to move the ball forward and extra 15 yards but can get no closer that 20 yards from goal?
2, the offending player spends the next 5 minutes off the pitch.
1, the team on the recieving end of a tactical foul gets to move the ball forward and extra 15 yards but can get no closer that 20 yards from goal?
2, the offending player spends the next 5 minutes off the pitch.
The rules don't need to be changed. Man City just need to get yellow cards every time they do it. Theyd finish games with 6 men
Yh it's not complicated, there's only an issue because there's no consistency. Pep's teams have always done this, as have most attacking teams that press and have a high defensive line because they leave themselves exposed to the counter. Given the PL has a number of really strong counter attacking teams, it makes sense that City (probably the most 'attacking' team in their setup) will be at the top of the tactical foul list.
This is a wider discussion because VAR has really highlighted the incompetence of pretty much all the PL referees. There's a reason our refs are rarely chosen to ref big European or national games and I honestly believe it's because they are seen as being sub standard. Regarding tactical fouls, refs just need to grow some balls - it's not hard to spot, they see it but they just don't want to call it because they'll get a load of abuse.
I feel like Premier league referees spend way too much time in their heads. So if there's an attention drawn to city's fouling, they almost go out of their way to prove they won't be swayed. Was the same when the Howard Webb United fan jokes peaked, he became a truly terrible ref for us.
They all need serious mental coaching to just call every incident as a standalone. Eg no way was matic a red, but he had a hard on for it since he gave an unnecessary early warning.
The refs favour the better teams, and have done so for years now. It used to work in your favour, now it doesn't.
While you're technically correct, there's clearly a different type of foul that gets more attention from referees.
If you foul somebody just outside their defensive box, usually just a quick free kick is rewarded with no warnings.
If you do it outside your own defensive box, it's either a stern telling off or an automatic yellow.
Therefore fouling in your opponents half gives you way more leniancy, and also allows your team to run back and get into shape faster. It also eliminates a dangerous free kick attempt as it's too far away.
You're also using your attackers to stop attacks, rather than your defenders. Meaning if they get yellows for repeat fouls - it's OK because they won't be in danger when the other team attacks.
We have all realised that Guardiola/Klopp are purposely doing this, and it's a very effective tactic as the rules haven't yet adjusted.
The point in actually enforcing the rules is not to punish people for the sake of it but to discourage from such behaviour. When red cards were handed out for studs-up challenges, did we see fifty red cards per weekend or did we see fewer studs-up challenges?
If players were booked for tackles that are prohibited by the laws of the game then they’d stop doing them after a few weeks and a couple of red cards. They're not amoebas who can't adapt to being called out for trying to bend the rules to gain an advantage on the pitch.
The refs are in charge of making sure that the players play within the laws of the game, not to ensure that the game isn't stop-start. And how much more does it stop a game to pull out a yellow card when you've already blown the whistle and stopped play? It ensures that the same player isn't going to commit 4-5 more fouls in the game (unless it's Matic because then you're off after three fouls obviously) and actually improves the flow of the game.
However, the refs need to be brave and actually send players off for these things if they get specific instructions to do so (which they haven't yet, despite media picking up on tactical fouling). A few years ago, they were told to stamp down on dissent. In the first few weeks we saw tons of yellow cards for dissent, but they never followed through on it because they let players off for incidents later on because they'd already been booked. During those weeks, Diego Costa was booked for dissent against West Ham. Later on in the game he made the tackle below on Adrian and didn't get a second yellow card, so it was all for nothing anyway.
Last edited:
I liked when Aguero dived for the umpteinth time and Matic "accidentally" fell onto his head after he went down. That was a good tactical foul. His one for the second yellow was pointless and stupid.
Also, I honestly think the only reason Rodri got away with it is because of Lingard's ridiculous triple role after the foul that would have been the first yellow. It made what was a clear foul look suspiciously like a dive with minimal or no contact and problably made the ref unsure if it warranted a card. Again Aguero did a similar ridiculous dive thing in the second half and the ref just ignored him completely and didn't even give the foul.
Sometimes refs are idiots but sometimes I feel like they are just reacting to the players treating them like idiots.
I thought Sterling was the only one who got off lightly. Had a full on tantrum after not getting a penalty for one dive then dived about another 6 times after. Ref wasn't taking much shite from anyone else but for some reason Sterling seems to be allowed to just cheat and whine his way through games with no consequence. Although I'm not even sure which team his performance last night was helping more.
Can't say I noticed the ref letting one team off with anything particularly. United kept trying to play their way out then passing it to no one, rather than being impeded.
Also, I honestly think the only reason Rodri got away with it is because of Lingard's ridiculous triple role after the foul that would have been the first yellow. It made what was a clear foul look suspiciously like a dive with minimal or no contact and problably made the ref unsure if it warranted a card. Again Aguero did a similar ridiculous dive thing in the second half and the ref just ignored him completely and didn't even give the foul.
Sometimes refs are idiots but sometimes I feel like they are just reacting to the players treating them like idiots.
I thought Sterling was the only one who got off lightly. Had a full on tantrum after not getting a penalty for one dive then dived about another 6 times after. Ref wasn't taking much shite from anyone else but for some reason Sterling seems to be allowed to just cheat and whine his way through games with no consequence. Although I'm not even sure which team his performance last night was helping more.
Can't say I noticed the ref letting one team off with anything particularly. United kept trying to play their way out then passing it to no one, rather than being impeded.
Jesus did a ridiculous quadruple roll off the pitch when Wan-Bissaka made a sliding tackle on him (from the side, not from behind). Didn't stop Friend from booking him, so yet another example of Friend applying different standards to the sides last night.
Was that the view of the ref though? Refs don’t see what I see and unless they see it they can’t call it, that's my point. Unless you want every tackle a ref doesn’t see reviewed your not going to have every call correct. Some fans honestly think refs set out to be bad at their job and do it because they have favourites etc, utter bollocks they have an impossible job to do with the speed of the game these day.The point in actually enforcing the rules is not to punish people for the sake of it but to discourage from such behaviour. When red cards were handed out for studs-up challenges, did we see fifty red cards per weekend or did we see fewer studs-up challenges?
If players were booked for tackles that are prohibited by the laws of the game then they’d stop doing them after a few weeks and a couple of red cards. They're not amoebas who can't adapt to being called out for trying to bend the rules to gain an advantage on the pitch.
The refs are in charge of making sure that the players play within the laws of the game, not to ensure that the game isn't stop-start. And how much more does it stop a game to pull out a yellow card when you've already blown the whistle and stopped play? It ensures that the same player isn't going to commit 4-5 more fouls in the game (unless it's Matic because then you're off after three fouls obviously) and actually improves the flow of the game.
However, the refs need to be brave and actually send players off for these things if they get specific instructions to do so (which they haven't yet, despite media picking up on tactical fouling). A few years ago, they were told to stamp down on dissent. In the first few weeks we saw tons of yellow cards for dissent, but they never followed through on it because they let players off for incidents later on because they'd already been booked. During those weeks, Diego Costa was booked for dissent against West Ham. Later on in the game he made the tackle below on Adrian and didn't get a second yellow card, so it was all for nothing anyway.
I obviously can't know what view the referee had of the incident but it's just the two of them over there and if the ref doesn't see that with no players obstructing his view he's either looking somewhere else or doesn't have eyesight good enough to be a referee. See the video below, the ref even gave a free kick so he just guessed it then?
I honestly think that the refs decision making is heavily influenced by the desire to have a quiet day at the office (ie "the crowd didn't shout too much, so I must've been good"), strongly shifting the momentum towards an agitated crowd rather than what's happening on the pitch. Why do you think we have so many 'homer' performances?
I don't think they set out to be bad at their jobs, and of course they can miss stuff, but if you see a counter-attack and a player commits a foul, and you see that foul and you give the free kick, then the yellow's surely a no-brainer? Or for example when we're trying to take a quick free kick in the 93rd minute and Jesus boots the ball off the pitch right in front of the ref, is that not a yellow card? There are so many obvious decision that just aren't taken by refs that you have to wonder what influences their decision making, because it definitely isn't the laws of the game to a hundred percent. How often have you seen a player go down, the ref wave it away for a dive, and then not give a yellow card? It's such a clear-cut decision that if you deem it a dive it's a yellow card. Yet so often the ref just can't be arsed with the laws and just does his own thing.
There is a difference between a foul and an obvious tactical foul.
A poorly timed, or excessive tackle is a foul. A clip of the heels from behind, with no intention to win the ball, is tactical.
The weight the refs give to them is out of kilter. A genuine but poorly executed tackle is punished more than the blatant cheating offence.
It beggars belief really, when you consider that using arms instead of feet, to impede the opponent, is an instant yellow, in most cases.
A poorly timed, or excessive tackle is a foul. A clip of the heels from behind, with no intention to win the ball, is tactical.
The weight the refs give to them is out of kilter. A genuine but poorly executed tackle is punished more than the blatant cheating offence.
It beggars belief really, when you consider that using arms instead of feet, to impede the opponent, is an instant yellow, in most cases.
They should employ the rule that Michael Oliver made up on the spot when we played Chelsea and were tactically fouling them. Team gets a warning for aggregating fouls and next player to tactically foul picks up a yellow card.
It was ridiculous the way that Oliver used it by apparently telling our captain 5 seconds before and not giving him any time to cascade it amongst the team so when Herrera did the next foul he was off but there’s merit in applying it as a rule if they can find a way to do it with consistency.
If the team thinks it’s harsh they shouldn’t have done 20 fouls in the last 10 minutes.
It was ridiculous the way that Oliver used it by apparently telling our captain 5 seconds before and not giving him any time to cascade it amongst the team so when Herrera did the next foul he was off but there’s merit in applying it as a rule if they can find a way to do it with consistency.
If the team thinks it’s harsh they shouldn’t have done 20 fouls in the last 10 minutes.
I absolutely agree.
I thought that the guidance given to referees was that any deliberate foul merits a yellow card (which is why pulling a players shirt is generally punished). It seems that referees are simply not following that guidance, or perhaps players are simply getting clever at making deliberate fouls appear accidental.
If the referees unfailingly booked players for deliberate fouls, irrespective of where on the pitch they happened, the issue would soon go away. The whole balance of risk versus reward for high pressing teams relies on being able to prevent counter attacks by fair means or foul. If that became untenable because of players picking up early cards, the tactics would have to change.
I have noticed that aswell. I wonder why that is.
It is a bit strange. Pressure and expectations I guess. If the favorite win then there is less anger from the weaker teams since they expected to be beaten anyway.
Although the size of the club should be a factor too. Still we barely get much with us these days. Although it is mainly when Oliver is around that things get 100% ignored. Very biased ref he is.
That was an obvious yellow Though, even with the quadruple role
Jesus also can't be that smart as he rolled so far he was about 4 metres off the pitch, so couldn't waste time pretending he was hurt.
Wan-Bissaka's yellow was hardly more obvious than Rodri's though, yet one's not given during the first half (so the player can keep committing fouls with impunity) whereas one's immediately punished, albeit at the end of the game.That was an obvious yellow Though, even with the quadruple role
Jesus also can't be that smart as he rolled so far he was about 4 metres off the pitch, so couldn't waste time pretending he was hurt.
I mean, can you really blame Matic for not knowing what's allowed and what's not when City commit eight fouls without bookings, some of which are very obvious and he gets booked for a simple trip?
I'm all for referees applying different standards for different games (derby game -> allow more physical play for example), but the players have to be able to adhere to the standards set within the game by the same ref. It's not one bit reasonable to change the bar at random intervals during the same game, because how are the players supposed to know what they can and can't do? If he lets Rodri off for a slide tackle from behind then he can't book a United player for a much less dangerous foul, and then let a City player off again for a similar foul, and then book a United player for a foul that is similar, but less severe than what Rodri wasn't booked for.
That refereeing inconsistency ended up costing us a chance to put them under pressure, but since he didn't give a ghost goal or some similar big error everyone will say he "got the big calls right" and not mention it anymore.
Last edited:
I was going to argue the point as to why they're different but someone has already done it better than i could
It works both ways - I would say it was more to do with how aggressive a crowd or manager was; a riled up Anfield or your old ground for example definitely did put pressure on refs, SAF would put fear into some of them but them others would make a point of being more strict with United as a reaction to him. Only need to look at Webb, got accused being a United fan so sacked off neutrality and turned on us to prove the public wrong.
As a few have said, they seem mentally very weak/impressionable - I think VAR will get better and start being much more of a help to them but there needs to be some consistency with how they're awarding cards because it still seems pretty random.
Finally, a bit more of that please
A feckin' men.
One red per 8000 tactical fouls. City will take those odds. Cnuts.
Not watching on Sky so would love to know what Martin AAGGUUEERROOOO Tyler had to say about it.
to be fair I think it was him that said something along the line of “sometimes those tactical fouls catch up with you”