Pogue Mahone
The caf's Camus.
Anyone? As blatant a DOGSO as you’ll ever see, surely?
He slid to block the initial shot so there is an attempt to play the ball. Being late and missing it doesn’t change what he attempted.No attempt at the ball, clear red that is.
Learned it in the VAR thread after Bednarak was sent off. I intend to overuse the hell out of it from now on.DOGSO.
He tried to block the shot, missed, and then committed the foul. It was a different movement. That’s why it was a foul.He slid to block the initial shot so there is an attempt to play the ball. Being late and missing it doesn’t change what he attempted.
Are you saying because he tried to play the ball on a previous shot, it's okay? Wonder how wide that margin can be spread in future.He slid to block the initial shot so there is an attempt to play the ball. Being late and missing it doesn’t change what he attempted.
He tried to block the shot, missed, and then committed the foul. It was a different movement. That’s why it was a foul.
As this tweet shows, He never stops slidingHe was still sliding when contact was made.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Nailed on penalty. Not DCL's problem if the contact was accidental, it still stopped him from getting to the ball.
He tried to block the shot and immediately tripped DCL. He was literally still sliding when DCL ran into him a millisecond later. There is no different movements.He tried to block the shot, missed, and then committed the foul. It was a different movement. That’s why it was a foul.
Players have had pens given against them with trailing legs etc that had no intention of making a tackle.Are you saying because he tried to play the ball on a previous shot, it's okay? Wonder how wide that margin can be spread in future.
This makes sense actually.He tried to block the shot and immediately tripped DCL. He was literally still sliding when DCL ran into him a millisecond later. There is no different movements.
It’s a foul because he slid across missing the block and getting the man. It’s not a red because he was attempting to block.
The previous shot came less than a second before the foul, so yes. Youre acting like it happened 10 seconds earlier.Are you saying because he tried to play the ball on a previous shot, it's okay? Wonder how wide that margin can be spread in future.
It’s not the slide that’s the problem. It’s the fact he sits up at the exact moment DCL is trying to vault over him. That’s why he trips him. That’s the foul. Not deliberate but not an attempt to play the ball either.For me its part of that same action to block the ball
As this tweet shows, He never stops sliding
But he wasnt playing the ball that gave away the pen. Its a seperate incident and scenario. Hes a play behind the action.The previous shot came less than a second before the foul, so yes. Youre acting like it happened 10 seconds earlier.
I don't think the ref has given it for the head lift, but because of the slide. He sees the slide as the obstruction.It’s not the slide that’s the problem. It’s the fact he sits up at the exact moment DCL is trying to vault over him. That’s why he trips him. That’s the foul. Not deliberate but not an attempt to play the ball either.
DCL falling over a defender who has slid straight into his path is definitely classed as a foul.I've got to be honest, I'm not sure it's a foul. Calvert-Lewin falling over TAA's head can't be classed as a foul. Yes, there's a little flick with his foot by TAA after that (which is an absolutely incomprehensible thing to do for a supposedly top defender) but by then DCL is already falling and it had no impact on him whatsoever. It's not a terrible decision but I wouldn't have given it myself, and I'd be aggrieved if that was given against us.
Regardless, the thread is correct that if you give the penalty you have to give the red, as it's definitely a clear scoring opportunity.
And once again, the scousers were absolutely going to lose this game anyway, so its typically rich to try and blame the defeat on the ref.
I'm not acting like anything.The previous shot came less than a second before the foul, so yes. Youre acting like it happened 10 seconds earlier.
But it didn't so I couldn't care less. It happened against Liverpool which makes it hilarious.If that happens against United, 99.99% of the above poster would say it’s not a penalty and that DCL runs into the defender and that it’s a new situation after the initial shot
Ok, look at it another way. DCL had two goal-scoring opportunities. The shot saved by Allison, which TAA unsuccessfully tried to block. Then another chance from the rebound. It was this second opportunity that was denied by a Liverpool defender who - unlike DCL - was not making any attempt to play the ball. DOGOS. Red card.I don't think the ref has given it for the head lift, but because of the slide. He sees the slide as the obstruction.
If it's for the head then it should be a red card, but I don't think that's what it is because he is still in motion.
He’s literally still sliding, there are no separate incidents within milliseconds of the same slide tackle.But he wasnt playing the ball that gave away the pen. Its a seperate incident and scenario. Hes a play behind the action.
Exactly.I'm not acting like anything.
I'm saying there were two parts to it. The first shot and DCL going for the tap in. Just because TAA hadn't reacted to the second one, it doesn't mean he isn't impeding DCL whilst not trying to play the ball.
Exactly. TAA is still on the first action. DCL is making another attempt. Surely it's more relevant what the attacker is doing in that instance?Players have had pens given against them with trailing legs etc that had no intention of making a tackle.
The fact it stopped a tap in makes it a stonewaller imo
I had the same opinion as you. But I can see the argument that the foul was part of the same slide. I disagree with that but at least that's a reasonable explanation.But he wasnt playing the ball that gave away the pen. Its a seperate incident and scenario. Hes a play behind the action.
There are no two parts to it. TAA attempts a slide tackle, he brings down DCL while still sliding. So yes you are acting like something. You don’t analyse slide tackles by the millisecond as different parts.I'm not acting like anything.
I'm saying there were two parts to it. The first shot and DCL going for the tap in. Just because TAA hadn't reacted to the second one, it doesn't mean he isn't impeding DCL whilst not trying to play the ball.
Certainly one way of looking at it! I think the refs view is that TAA has made a genuine attempt to block the ball and it is that action that has carried over to second action of impeding DCL's run.Ok, look at it another way. DCL had two goal-scoring opportunities. The shot saved by Allison, which TAA unsuccessfully tried to block. Then another chance from the rebound. When he was fouled by a Liverpool defender who was not making any attempt to play the ball. DOGOS. Red card.