Was Lindelofs foul for Tuanzebe’s goal the correct decision?

SadlerMUFC

Thinks for himself
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
5,746
Location
Niagara Falls, Canada
Why is this funny? It was very dangerous, could have ended the life of the other player there. Definite red card.
The only reason it's dangerous is because the Real defender isn't paying attention. Who is he marking and who is he looking at? He's not watching the ball. Lindelof goes for ball and he's in his way. Sorry if their player got hurt but don't stand in the way of people trying to play football and you won't get hurt...
 

The Original

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
1,374
Location
#3 Memory Lane
So you'd be happy for the referee to award a penalty against a Utd player for something like that?
Of course, I wouldn't be any more happy about it than I am about having Tuanzebe's goal ruled out. But it was the correct call and I certainly would take no joy in seeing a player get hurt in such a potentially serious manner, just for the sake of some entertainment.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,348
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
He can jump, but if he misses trying to be a decoy and knees someone in the face, it’s obviously a foul :lol:

It’s like asking why shouldn’t a defender go diving in for a last gasp tackle and twatting through an opposition player without the ball, cause “decoy”.
What’s this decoy crap? He jumped to try and head the ball. Mistimed his leap and accidentally crashed into a defender who chose to stand underneath the path of the ball without making any attempt to play it.

Never a foul. The yellow card was an atrocious decision.
 

The Original

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
1,374
Location
#3 Memory Lane
The only reason it's dangerous is because the Real defender isn't paying attention. Who is he marking and who is he looking at? He's not watching the ball. Lindelof goes for ball and he's in his way. Sorry if their player got hurt but don't stand in the way of people trying to play football and you won't get hurt...

You mean the ball that Lindelof misses by a country mile? What's the point of having fouls in the rulebook when you can simply demand that all opponents simply give way to players flying around?
 

diarm

Full Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
16,681
Accidentally fouling someone is still a foul.
I agree with this. The defender doesn't intend to foul Lindelof and to be fair to him, he probably doesn't know too much about it.

But at the end of the day, he has prevented Victor from reaching the ball and was fortunate not to concede the penalty.
 

Tomuś

Nani is crap, I tell you!
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
6,177
Location
Świdnik
All those years of watching him shy away from aerial duels only to come Schmeichel style on an opponent (who was nowhere near the ball himself) to stop the first senior goal for his team-mate and a win for us.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,348
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
He can jump, but if he misses trying to be a decoy and knees someone in the face, it’s obviously a foul :lol:

It’s like asking why shouldn’t a defender go diving in for a last gasp tackle and twatting through an opposition player without the ball, cause “decoy”.
Not to mention that you’ve previously agreed about how dangerous it is to get under an airborne player. Turns out it can be dangerous for both parties. Moral of the story. Compete for the ball in the air, or get the feck out of the way.
 

AgentSmith

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2019
Messages
1,555
What’s this decoy crap? He jumped to try and head the ball. Mistimed his leap and accidentally crashed into a defender who chose to stand underneath the path of the ball without making any attempt to play it.

Never a foul. The yellow card was an atrocious decision.
Do you think it was a foul by Lindelof?
 

JJ12

Predicted Portugal, Italy to win Euro 2016, 2020
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
10,838
Location
Wales
Accidentally fouling someone is still a foul.
So instead of giving us a pen, Axel can keep his goal.
Not to mention that you’ve previously agreed about how dangerous it is to get under an airborne player. Turns out it can be dangerous for both parties. Moral of the story. Compete for the ball in the air, or get the feck out of the way.
The ol’ Kane trick
 

Oranges038

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
11,781
Of course, I wouldn't be any more happy about it than I am about having Tuanzebe's goal ruled out. But it was the correct call and I certainly would take no joy in seeing a player get hurt in such a potentially serious manner, just for the sake of some entertainment.

In my view not jumping for the ball and impeding a player in the air is more dangerous and more of a foul that what Lindelof did. The lad could have been seriously hurt if he landed awkwardly because of it.

This complaint is levelled at Harry Kane every week. The dirty baassssteeerrd.
 

charlenefan

Far less insightful than the other Charley
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
33,052
Is jumping for a ball and hitting someone who hasn't jumped a foul? I mean if they both jumped its not a foul right?

Regardless of where you stand on whether it's a foul or not though that defender weren't getting near the ball before it got to Tuanzebe so yeah not sure it was right the goal was ruled out
 

The Original

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
1,374
Location
#3 Memory Lane
In my view not jumping for the ball and impeding a player in the air is more dangerous and more of a foul that what Lindelof did. The lad could have been seriously hurt if he landed awkwardly because of it.

This complaint is levelled at Harry Kane every week. The dirty baassssteeerrd.
That's not what happened. You do not impede a player who comes into your path--you impede when you move into their path.
 

JJ12

Predicted Portugal, Italy to win Euro 2016, 2020
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
10,838
Location
Wales
Think it's time to update @JJ12 tag, "His eyes on the ball"
:lol: :lol:
Definitely better than predicting something that happened in 2016!
Do hope you wumming. :lol:
That would be underwhelming to say the least. You do have an odd sense of humour I must say.
 

sincher

"I will cry if Rooney leaves"
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
25,587
Location
YSC
He only had eyes for the ball but I guess technically it was a foul.

Shame. Axel deserved the goal.
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
6,034
That was so funny man.

He had a decent game but this is kind of like when he got outmuscled by Diagne for the goal against West Brom and then in the next 2-4 headers completely overcompensates and just bulldozed through him instead.

It was an impressive leap that pretty much ended with him ducking under the ball because his timing was a bit off, which is something we've seen more than a few times before..

I really don't want to sneek a line of criticism as it's more of an observation there but man it's just too easy ffs :lol:
 

The Original

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
1,374
Location
#3 Memory Lane
By not moving he is still impeding his flight toward the ball.
Come on. This is comical at this point.

1. First of all Lindelof was not moving towards the ball.
2. Even if the player jumps he would still be impeding Lindelof by your definition.

Thus, you have just argued that defenders must simply move out of the way of an oncoming attacker. And this, regardless of whether said attacker is even near the ball.
 

George Owen

LEAVE THE SFW THREAD ALONE!!1!
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
15,805
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
Missed the game because I was playing football.

Just saw this, and I cant believe he wasn't sent off. :lol:

That's some shit for the MMA thread.
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
6,314
Don’t about the rules, but for me, that is a foul and possibly a red anywhere on the pitch, except in this situation. It’s a corner, people jump, people are physical, but this guy is day dreaming and not alert at all.

In the end it doesn’t change anything but feel for Tuanzebe who got his first goal.
 

AgentSmith

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2019
Messages
1,555
Just to add the official perspective on this (I've bolded the parts I thought might be relevant)

This is from the 'IFAB's 2020-21 Laws of the Game' explanation of what constitutes a foul --- https://www.thefa.com/football-rule.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct free kick

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

  • charges
  • jumps at
  • kicks or attempts to kick
  • pushes
  • strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
  • tackles or challenges
  • trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
  • Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed.
  • Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned.
  • Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off.
Indirect free kick

An indirect free kick is awarded if a player:

  • plays in a dangerous manner
  • impedes the progress of an opponent without any contact being made
  • is guilty of dissent, using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures or other verbal offences
  • prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from the hands or kicks or attempts to kick the ball when the goalkeeper is in the process of releasing it
  • commits any other offence, not mentioned in the Laws, for which play is stopped to caution or send off a player
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it would be impossible to argue that Lindelof's knee to the head, although accidental, didn't break at least one of the rules in bold. The yellow was probably harsh given there was no reckless intention or malice in his challenge and it was the fact that the defender stayed rooted to the ground that exacerbated the whole thing. The challenge also had no effect on the actual goal so it reinforces the feelings of unfairness about it - I get that.

But the simple fact is he smashed his knee into an opponent's head, with force and carelessness, while failing to get a touch on the ball. A foul 10 times out of 10. I have a suspicion people arguing to the contrary would have a different opinion if it had been a Real Sociedad centre back flooring a United player.
 
Last edited:

The Original

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
1,374
Location
#3 Memory Lane
Just to add the official perspective on this (I've bolded the parts I thought might be relevant)

This is from the 'IFAB's 2020-21 Laws of the Game' explanation of what constitutes a foul --- https://www.thefa.com/football-rule.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct free kick

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

  • charges
  • jumps at
  • kicks or attempts to kick
  • pushes
  • strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
  • tackles or challenges
  • trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
  • Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed.
  • Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned.
  • Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off.
Indirect free kick

An indirect free kick is awarded if a player:

  • plays in a dangerous manner
  • impedes the progress of an opponent without any contact being made
  • is guilty of dissent, using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures or other verbal offences
  • prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from the hands or kicks or attempts to kick the ball when the goalkeeper is in the process of releasing it
  • commits any other offence, not mentioned in the Laws, for which play is stopped to caution or send off a player
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it would be impossible to argue that Lindelof's knee to the head, although accidental, didn't break at least one of the rules in bold. The yellow was probably harsh given there was no reckless intention or malice in his challenge and it was the fact that the defender stayed rooted to the ground that exacerbated the whole thing. The challenge also had no effect on the actual goal so it reinforces the feelings of unfairness about it. I get that.

But the simple fact is he connected his knee cap to an opponent's skull, with force and carelessness, while failing to get a touch on the ball. A foul 10 times out of 10. I have a suspicion people arguing to the contrary would have a different opinion if it had been a Real Sociedad centre back flooring a United player.
@ SadlerMUFC

If you're having trouble with Google, here's what you're looking for.