The term 'Tactical foul' is the most irritating in football currently, they're just fouls for feck sake.
'Tactical' fouls
- Thread starter matherto
- Start date
Its the same reason why you go away to Burnley and get the shit kicked out of you as if rules doesnt exist.
Its beyond ridiculous at this stage
If thats a foul he may as well not bother trying to challenge
I'd like to see football introduce team punishments for tactical fouls that are used either to break up counters or to target players.
The offending team could be given a yellow, meaning that each member of said team is then judged to be on a warning when the official is considering any further incident related to the initial team caution.
The offending team could be given a yellow, meaning that each member of said team is then judged to be on a warning when the official is considering any further incident related to the initial team caution.
A blatant foul, ie a tactical foul where you make no attempt to win the ball and are tripping someone up just to stop and attack should be a straight red in my opinion.
Liverpool are as bad as City for it, you'd lose half your team before half time.
Agreed! I'm not sure it's a popular opinion however, hence my suggestion.
You would end up with 5 a side football. Im a fan of calling the captain over and talking to him. The ref can then explain how to proceed, ' i've seen two tactical fouls, I see any more and i'm handing out yellows. Don't care who it is, tell your team.'
You wouldn't end up with 5 a side.
Players aren't that stupid. They'd stop doing it if they started getting punished for it.
Tactical cheating.
So you wouldn't even give yellow cards for the first two? That's an interesting approach.
I prefer the straight red idea. Players would learn quickly.
I think it’s two things. First thing is the reputation based bias, our attacks being perceived as not dangerous. Second is the fact that high pressing teams benefit from their tactics because they can foul higher up the pitch, and referees are never giving a yellow card for those tactical fouls in those areas. The whole philosophy is strongly based on defending with fouls, and thus it’s very difficult to attack against these teams if you can’t have much of the ball yourself.
Given the way the rules are I have no issues with teams doing it
I still kinda remember Herrera's foul on Barkley? in the fa cup semi final.
Just blatantly grabbed the shirt and held on until Barkley stopped. Obvious foul but rule dictates it's no more than a yellow
Refs do go into games with a bias and don't treat all fouls the same
I'm surprised more managers don't point it out. Once they do, then you will see sky sports and such start discussing it. Once that happens refs will have it in their mind
I still kinda remember Herrera's foul on Barkley? in the fa cup semi final.
Just blatantly grabbed the shirt and held on until Barkley stopped. Obvious foul but rule dictates it's no more than a yellow
Refs do go into games with a bias and don't treat all fouls the same
I'm surprised more managers don't point it out. Once they do, then you will see sky sports and such start discussing it. Once that happens refs will have it in their mind
I really don't see why people have such a problem with them it part of the game, taking one for the team etc. They should be treated like any other foul if its bad enough to be treated as a red its a sending off, if its a clip of the heals or such should be a yellow and any further similar challenge be sent off.
Like many others this new term fro a "professional foul" is really irritating, personally I like the idea that certain teams play in certain ways, not to the existent of kicking lumps out of teams. The ref has a protocol and should use it. This constant sanitising of football is tedious.
Like many others this new term fro a "professional foul" is really irritating, personally I like the idea that certain teams play in certain ways, not to the existent of kicking lumps out of teams. The ref has a protocol and should use it. This constant sanitising of football is tedious.
The term tactical foul is adequate to describe the specific infringement in the laws of the game that says that a yellow should be handed if a foul stops a promising attack.
So no, it’s not just a foul
But the point is he got booked?
If every side fouled like City the game would become a stop start shitshow
But they already had a name, its a professional foul, they have been about since man could kick a football. Its not just in football either, pretty rife in rugby too.
this is why people talk about tactical fouls. “For the tactical purpose” “interfering with or breaking up a promising attack”. Straight from the horse’s mouth.
How much clearer can it be that a tactical foul should be a yellow? And why is tactical foul such an idiotic phrase invented by people on the internet?
A professional foul is not the same. Professional foul was the last man challenge that used to be a red, now replaced by the DOGSO term. See my other reply to you.
For me straight red is reserved for violent or dangerous play. Or blatant last man fouls.
I think two is fair. First game of the season Man City vs Hammers Man City had 8 fouls in the first half, like seven of them niggling tactical fouls, zero cards given out. Mike Dean is hot garbage, after two the ref should be able to summon the captain, speak to him, tell him no more or the next one is a yellow, doesnt matter who it is, it's a yellow. Then the captain can go spread the message to the team.
Because they have existed before and were called "professional fouls".
this is why people talk about tactical fouls. “For the tactical purpose” “interfering with or breaking up a promising attack”. Straight from the horse’s mouth.
How much clearer can it be that a tactical foul should be a yellow? And why is tactical foul such an idiotic phrase invented by people on the internet?
Not for me, I never heard a professional foul being a last man challenge, it was always an intentional foul to break up play. Its always been in the game.
What they are called is besides the point, I have no problem with them but they should be dealt with accordingly, I really don't see the fuss.
What about City's tactical diving that got Matic sent off? They're very good at it.
Again its cheating and just as bad, as deliberate fouling, but again there are clear rules for such things. Its at the discretion of the ref on the day.
"Assault" Are you serious lad? This sort of statement sounds as if it's been produced by modern day schools where everything that you don't like is multiplied 10 fold and then talked about on the internet.
Every sport has tactical fauls. If you would be serious about this then why not be pedantic and every time someone kicks the ball out of play it could be considered as "cheating" against the game, as it's designed to stop the game play and not regain possesion.
The player who commits a foul from behind is punished by a yellow card, the game goes on, that's it. There is nothing to discuss about it.
Even if it became a red card offense you'd still have situations when it's better to get the red card, like Valverde did in spanish super-cup game against Atletico Madrid to stop Morata and give his team a chance on penalties. There will always be a price to pay and the value someone will be willing to pay. Unless it's vicious with intent to injure someone it's legit part of the game. Let's not bubble wrap everything and allow for some physical contact.
Yeah he got booked. Some people mentioned it should be a straight red.
Exactly, teams who base their defensive strategy on tactical fouling are simply exploiting a clear issue in the general refereeing in England.
Agreed, yellow for the first then read for any "deliberate" foul, whether that's shirt pulling, obstruction, clipping of heals ect. I don't think its just an English problem either, but I do genuinely feel for referees at the moment.
I suppose the Ref's wild inconsistency last night is the origin of this debate. If he was punishing equivalent fouls equally, we wouldn't be complaining. And Citeh would have been walking on egg shells most of the game. The cheek on Pep when he says he never instructs them to commit those fouls...
First yellow is not a yellow for me. It only justifies a booking if he makes some hefty contact there and he barely touches him.
The second is a classic tactical foul though. Not blatant and tried to be soft enough to escape the red, but it was a silly risk to take with a yellow already.
Agree with the general thrust that referees are poor at managing tactical fouling. Mostly because they lack the deep understanding of the game to envisage how a counter attack will open up, whereas players have a better sense of what's about to unfold if they don't do it.
The second is a classic tactical foul though. Not blatant and tried to be soft enough to escape the red, but it was a silly risk to take with a yellow already.
Agree with the general thrust that referees are poor at managing tactical fouling. Mostly because they lack the deep understanding of the game to envisage how a counter attack will open up, whereas players have a better sense of what's about to unfold if they don't do it.
Do you honestly believe this? The refs have a lack of understanding of the game?
I would say they find it hard to manage because if they were to follow up on every foul the flow of the game would be ruined. They also have a seconds to make a decision on whether an incident is a foul or a simple 50/50 challenge. The only way you will get consistency is to have the VAR ref making all the calls on the pitch and simply relaying all instructions to the on field ref who will basically be a runner.
It seems to me that refs are pretty consistent with tactical fooling (at least in France, I'm not sure about England but i watch a lot of PL games and was rarely shocked). Someone mention plausible deniability and that's a very good term to describe how you're supposed to fault. If the defender is behind the attacker during the transition, grabs him or makes it obvious he couldn't play the ball, he will get booked. If the defender commits the offense at the very beginning of the transition, high up the pitch (that's often what City does) pretending as much as he can that he's playing the ball, he has chanced to escape booking.
Imo, Matic didn't deserve his first yellow but the second one was pretty standard.
Imo, Matic didn't deserve his first yellow but the second one was pretty standard.
I think if you've played the game for years you can envisage better how attacks open up. You can see three or four passes down the line and can anticipate threats much earlier. Broad generalisation but reading the game like that is why many players are professional and can see danger better than those who haven't. Refs are obviously experienced in refereeing but many do not have that same level of anticipation. Often they will judge a tactical foul in isolation, particularly those higher up the park that Liverpool and City excel in, without taking into account the breadth of vision of the full park.
Ultimately that is why managers encourage their teams to do it - because the punishment meted out by referees does not reflect the benefit accrued by the teams who do it.
Ok tell me the reaction to a ref if he dealt out every decision by the book, the stop starting of the game would be ridiculous and the flow of the game destroyed, and IMO most refs will try to keep a game flowing as much as possible. At the end of the day football is a contact sport and again the margins an on field ref has to see and judge a challenge is minute to what we as fans see. Either we accept we wont ever see a perfectly ruled game or we take the on field refs job ff him and give it to a ref in a studio. Even then there will be argument and not everyone will agree, as we see on MOTD every week.
There is very little that ruins a game of football as much as deliberate tactical fouling. Stopping a breakaway with a deliberate foul should always be at least a yellow card. The niggly little fouls in an attritional midfield battle are covered under persistent fouling though yes, it would be better if it was made clear that it applies to the entire team.
They ruin the game for me or at least are coming close. I want to see goals and exciting play, not cynical fouls because you and you're team are out of position. This area is a great consideration for some kind of penalty box, where the offender is cautioned and then has to sit out for 10 mins or something, forcing his team to play a man down. Or just make it a straight red. I'm pretty fed up with it.
I don’t mean to be a dick about this but your opinion of what a professional foul is doesn’t have any relevance when the rules (used to) say otherwise.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_foul
As you can see there the professional foul was then changed to the DOGSO rule in 2016 saying that it’s a yellow if committed inside the box and in an attempt to play the ball. A professional foul used to be punished with a red card but only a one-game suspension as opposed to the three game suspension for violent conduct or serious foul play.
Like I said, in the current laws of the games, the lawmakers themselves refers to the tactical fouls as tactical, so I don’t really see how your annoyance at people using the term is anything but your own problem.
I saw your post later as well where you said that you don’t have a problem as long as they’re adequately dealt with, which, again, according to the laws of the game, is by showing the player a yellow card. Do we agree on that?
My problem is that referees in the premier league are obviously ignorant of the laws of the game (or biased in their reluctance to apply them as it’s the same teams getting away with this for the past three years) and apply completely different standards within the same game which, as a single among many examples, killed our chances of coming back to win the tie last night. We would’ve had a much bigger chance to come back if their players had been booked for their aggressive play or if Matic hadn’t been booked for incidents that they got away with multiple times during the very same game.
A lot of text here but it all boils down to the conclusion that English refs are shit either deliberately or non-deliberately because they aren’t following the laws of the game in relation to tactical fouling.
No, they are different things.
They are literally part of a tactic teams use to break play up, usually in apparently "harmless" areas of the pitch that won't draw bookings, but kill momentum.
City, Pool are the chief users of this. But any high press team is bound to do it.
I think we are agreeing with how they should be delt with but a professional foul always was and still is, as quoted in your link...
"In various sports, a professional foul is a deliberate act of foul play intended to bring about an advantage for the perpetrator's team. Professional fouls are usually committed to prevent an opponent from scoring."
Whether or not new rules were introduced in 2016 for dealing with these incidents doesn't change that definition of a professional foul. Professional foul/ Tactical foul both the same thing, deliberately fouling someone for your teams advantage, in my opinion of course.