Straya - A-League and State Leagues

CCM v Heart, 7:30pm SkySports 3 | Glory v Adelaide 11:45pm SkySports 2

126 replies · 11,913 views
almost 13 years ago

el grapadura wrote:

Leggy wrote:

Very harsh red card. I don't think he did that on purpose. Penalty was enough.



Very harsh.

If it's a penalty, it's a red card. It's the Laws of the Game.


Doesn't always happen though. Ref discresion 



Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

Melbourne Heart coach John Aloisi sent off to the stands after a confrontation with the ref in the tunnel over the Gerhardt handball
Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Leggy wrote:

Very harsh red card. I don't think he did that on purpose. Penalty was enough.



Very harsh.

If it's a penalty, it's a red card. It's the Laws of the Game.


Doesn't always happen though. Ref discresion 


No. It's called denying a goal under the Laws of the Game, and is direct red card offence, no referee discretion at all.
Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

el grapadura wrote:

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Leggy wrote:

Very harsh red card. I don't think he did that on purpose. Penalty was enough.



Very harsh.

If it's a penalty, it's a red card. It's the Laws of the Game.


Doesn't always happen though. Ref discresion 


No. It's called denying a goal under the Laws of the Game, and is direct red card offence, no referee discretion at all.


So every penalty there has to be a red card and always is a red card ? You're wrong.



Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago


for mine he was attempting to deny the goal by throwing his body in front of the ball.should of kept his arm down though.blah blah

                                                                        COYN    

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Leggy wrote:

Very harsh red card. I don't think he did that on purpose. Penalty was enough.



Very harsh.

If it's a penalty, it's a red card. It's the Laws of the Game.


Doesn't always happen though. Ref discresion 


No. It's called denying a goal under the Laws of the Game, and is direct red card offence, no referee discretion at all.


So every penalty there has to be a red card and always is a red card ? You're wrong.


No I'm talking about this instance you muppet.
Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

AJ13 wrote:

Feverish wrote:

patrick478 wrote:

Feverish wrote:

I dont think pen was overly harsh. If someone throws themselves at the ball like that and didnt get sent off and you missed the pen - you would be mightily farked off

Once the ref had given the penalty, it had to be a red card. It wasn't an intentional handball, so shouldn't have been a penalty.
def a pen
Yeah i agree. Its not like he was standing still and the ball hit him. He moved toward the ball, hand out stretched in front of his body, doesnt really leave the ref with much choice.
 


Yellow Fever - Misery loves company

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Leggy wrote:

Very harsh red card. I don't think he did that on purpose. Penalty was enough.



Very harsh.

If it's a penalty, it's a red card. It's the Laws of the Game.


Doesn't always happen though. Ref discresion 


No. It's called denying a goal under the Laws of the Game, and is direct red card offence, no referee discretion at all.


So every penalty there has to be a red card and always is a red card ? You're wrong.

This was a penalty that denied a clear goal scoring opportunity. Fouls in the box that are not denying clear goal scoring opportunity are not worthy of red cards, but that didn't happen in this case. You're wrong.

Yellow Fever - Misery loves company

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

el grapadura wrote:

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Leggy wrote:

Very harsh red card. I don't think he did that on purpose. Penalty was enough.



Very harsh.

If it's a penalty, it's a red card. It's the Laws of the Game.


Doesn't always happen though. Ref discresion 


No. It's called denying a goal under the Laws of the Game, and is direct red card offence, no referee discretion at all.


So every penalty there has to be a red card and always is a red card ? You're wrong.


No I'm talking about this instance you muppet.


Alright, sorry. 



Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

patrick478 wrote:

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

nufc_nz wrote:

el grapadura wrote:

Leggy wrote:

Very harsh red card. I don't think he did that on purpose. Penalty was enough.



Very harsh.

If it's a penalty, it's a red card. It's the Laws of the Game.


Doesn't always happen though. Ref discresion 


No. It's called denying a goal under the Laws of the Game, and is direct red card offence, no referee discretion at all.


So every penalty there has to be a red card and always is a red card ? You're wrong.

This was a penalty that denied a clear goal scoring opportunity. Fouls in the box that are not denying clear goal scoring opportunity are not worthy of red cards, but that didn't happen in this case. You're wrong.

Yep (although this was not DOGSO but denying the goal situation, but the principle is the same).
Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

#chillax



Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

patrick478 wrote:

AJ13 wrote:

Feverish wrote:

patrick478 wrote:

Feverish wrote:

I dont think pen was overly harsh. If someone throws themselves at the ball like that and didnt get sent off and you missed the pen - you would be mightily farked off

Once the ref had given the penalty, it had to be a red card. It wasn't an intentional handball, so shouldn't have been a penalty.
def a pen
Yeah i agree. Its not like he was standing still and the ball hit him. He moved toward the ball, hand out stretched in front of his body, doesnt really leave the ref with much choice.
 



The distance between the opponent and the ball  just about sums it up.

If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

patrick478 wrote:

AJ13 wrote:

Feverish wrote:

patrick478 wrote:

Feverish wrote:

I dont think pen was overly harsh. If someone throws themselves at the ball like that and didnt get sent off and you missed the pen - you would be mightily farked off

Once the ref had given the penalty, it had to be a red card. It wasn't an intentional handball, so shouldn't have been a penalty.
def a pen
Yeah i agree. Its not like he was standing still and the ball hit him. He moved toward the ball, hand out stretched in front of his body, doesnt really leave the ref with much choice.
 

And being down to referee interpretation...

A deliberate act of a player making contact: yes. The player moved toward the ball to prevent the goal. 
Movement of hand towards the ball: yes - his hand moved with the rest of him
The distance: there was enough distance for the ref to rule out accidental

Thats the thing with interpretation, not everybody sees everything the same.
Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

2-0



Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago


thanks for coming

                                                                        COYN    

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

Looking forward to hearing Aloisi's comments after this game.

Like a chocoholic but for booze

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

Ugh i got some sydney kid trying to troll me on facebook because i posted 'Perth to win'

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

Caceres looks like one decent prospect 
Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

AJ13 wrote:

Ugh i got some sydney kid trying to troll me on facebook because i posted 'Perth to win'



Perth winning is awsome on 2 levels.  giggles cause sydney miss out and also Victory will have wound up 3 spot so will hopefully put in a sub standard effort tomorrow.

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago · edited almost 13 years ago · History

The rules as stated above leave some discretion. I think his arms were not in the "natural" position at his side but I don't think it was intentional, so I think it's grey. But once you've decided it's a pen, you have by default decided its intentional, and therefore it is a red card. Personally, I think there should be latitude for the penalty to be awarded on the basis that a flailing arm has prevented a goal, but without requiring a red bc the act was not intentional or sinister, rather it was clumsy (and that is actually how some refs effectively make their rulings).

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

It gets tricky trying to account for clumsiness in drafting rules/laws for anything.

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

I reckon that these refs did not make it as players and are just getting their own back.

If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

Dmac ya tricky trickster

                                                                        COYN    

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

Heart break an 8hr goal drought outside Melbourne. Dunno what Pasfield was doing in the lead up to the goal.

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

Come on CCM. Don't switch off.


Yellow Fever - Misery loves company

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

 The problem with Heart is that they have always been too casual and they don't have enough steel.

They have talent but waste it.

If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

Heart break an 8hr goal drought outside Melbourne. Dunno what Pasfield was doing in the lead up to the goal.

Pasfield is Pasfield. Never rated the guy
Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

"on the edge of the D" hehe

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

mcbreen just wide.  Lucky...  someone else from CCM score. 

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

colisimo wtf?

                                                                        COYN    

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

mcbreen just wide.  Lucky...  someone else from CCM score. 


It's just a matter of time.
Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

What is it with the 8yr old looking linos this season?

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

AJ13 wrote:

What is it with the 8yr old looking linos this season?

I confirm that at least one of them is most DEFINITELY not 8 years old.

End of an era.  Vinnie - It's over.

If anyone cares for my inane babbling follow @iluvnix17 on the Twitter.

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

el grapadura wrote:

It gets tricky trying to account for clumsiness in drafting rules/laws for anything.

that's a disingenuous comment. The test would still be whether intentional. The problem we have now is that refs want to give a pen bc a goal has been prevented by the arm, but are then committed to a red card bc by definition a penalty requires an intentional hand ball. There should be room to give a penalty to compensate for the goal denied but without harshly punishing a player (and team) who has acted without intent. 
Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

I <3 Nix wrote:

AJ13 wrote:

What is it with the 8yr old looking linos this season?

I confirm that at least one of them is most DEFINITELY not 8 years old.
That one is going to be a lino at Westpac tomorrow. 

Yellow Fever - Misery loves company

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

So when a player stands on the goal line, spreads his arms and the ball hits him on the arm, would that be  red card or not under what you're proposing?

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

 Full-time 2-1 CCM.  All up to us now

Permalink Permalink
almost 13 years ago

Result! Come on 'nix. We gonna be penultimate, not ultimate.

Like a chocoholic but for booze

Permalink Permalink