UEFA Champions League 2013/2014

No, he won't.
There's a clause concerning that issue that have been implanted when he was loaned this year, same one as Lukaku's.
 
beachryan said:
This 'triple jeapardy' red card is such a joke. Trust FIFA to get something so wrong. What are defenders/keepers supposed to do?

It's a 50/50 ball. If the striker gets there first, you give a penalty, a red card and a suspension. If the keeper gets there first, it's a simple foul, doubtful even a yellow.

Common sense has no place in FIFA or their rules.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying, but let's picture a different scenario. The striker gets first and rounds the keeper, he has an empty net to score. The goalkeeper then fouls him to prevent the sure goal. Imagine they don't send off the goalkeeper, and he saves the penalty.

The outcome: a sure goal ends up with a simple yellow card. This opens the door to all kind of dirty behavior to avoid clear chances knowing that you won't be sent off if it's a penalty.

Take Demichelis red card with Messi the other day. Should it be a yellow only if it was inside the area (thena penalty) and a red card if it's outside the area and no penalty is given? This is simply too confusing.

In my oppinion, rules have to favour attacking players and goal chances. So, if DeMichelis doesn't want his team being punished, then don't tackle Messi if you are the last man and you risk too much. Simple as that.

Of course, there are certain situations there's no clear intention to foul the player and the ball is loose. Take Robben penalty as example.

The only change to the rules that I would apply is that if the ref considers that there wasn't a clear intention of fouling, then he could show a yellow instead of a red. I think we should evaluate intentions.

Demichelis intention was not to take the ball from Messi. It was to stop Messi yes or yes, being by tackling the ball or tripping his legs. To me that's a red card being the last man, no matter if it's inside or outside the area. In the case of Robben, I'd give a penalty and a yellow (I watched the play only once, so I may be wrong here) because the goalkeeper intention wasn't to commit penalty, but he did.
 
Last edited:
@ Drekkard - it would just take a change in the wording of the rule to encapsulate the difference between a 'deliberate' foul and an 'honest' one. It would then be down to the ref's interpretation of the act.

That's the best we can hope for from the footballing authorities I fear.

There were two interesting suggestions in the F365 mailbox this morning:
1. The ref waits til after the penalty to give the card. If he scores, it's a yellow (because he didn't deny the goal scoring opp); if he misses it's red.

2. The captain of the fouled team can choose - either a red card OR a penalty.

I just think the rule at the moment has gone too far in the attacker's favor. Any time a defender challenges for a ball - much less at full sprint - there is a chance they'll foul the attacker. That's every duel anywhere on the pitch. I don't think the 'right' punishment for an honest attempt shoudl be so game changing.

Taken to the extreme, in both situations this week, you'd of prefered the defender/keeper to just stand still, and wave the striker on to score in an open net, rather than risking an attempt at stopping them. That's preposterous behaviour to incentivise. Not to mention the incentive on an attacker diving if he knows he's through.
 
The only time it should be a red card is when the player has a clear path to the goal and he is brought down outside the box. Inside the box and red is nonsense, because you effectively give the team a new goal scoring chance by giving a penalty.
 
Just leave it as it is, as was said on the radio station, if it was roles reversed no-one here would be talking about it, it just be reversed on who was discussing.

Whilst it seems an idea about intentional fouls etc, that's just going to open up a whole new debate.


FD
 
I put it in 3 points because I think we can break the discussion on those different points. It's an interesting debate as people may have different visions about it. Personally, I think attacking football must have an incentive. The NBA, probably the best sports competition in terms of organization (except the all-star weekend) introduced a clear path foul specifically for this purpose, punishing the defending team.

So:

beachryan said:
Taken to the extreme, in both situations this week, you'd of prefered the defender/keeper to just stand still, and wave the striker on to score in an open net, rather than risking an attempt at stopping them.
Click to expand...
1- Yes, defenders should try to stop an attacker by fair means. Tackling or going to the ground it's a clear attempt of bringing down the man if he doesn't touch the ball, so... If it's the last man, don't bring it down with a risky move. Demichelis had lost position and Messi was through on an open goal situation. If Demichelis decides to tackle he knows what he's risking, it's his fault. Defend better. Try to stop Messi without bringing him down.

Damjan said:
The only time it should be a red card is when the player has a clear path to the goal and he is brought down outside the box. Inside the box and red is nonsense, because you effectively give the team a new goal scoring chance by giving a penalty.
Click to expand...
2- I find it very confusing that outside the area it would be a red and inside only a yellow. Fouling the last man in a clear chance must always be a red card, otherwise you are overprotecting the defenders and allowing them to safely prevent very clear chances.

Plus, as I said, what if the striker rounds the keeper and is intentionally fouled? If you don't send off the keeper, you're punishing the team that had an empty net situation! Imagine the goalkeeper saves the penalty or the striker misses it. We move from a sure goal to a missed chance. That will incentive defenders and keepers precisely to do more penalties in desperate situations, knowing they won't be sent off. Will be witness again defenders saving balls with their hands? That's what we want?

The only possible solution (I know it introduces grey areas) is to judge the intentionality.

beachryan said:
That's preposterous behaviour to incentivise. Not to mention the incentive on an attacker diving if he knows he's through.
Click to expand...
3- About diving, I think we all will agree it would stop very quickly the moment UEFA puts bans on players that dive. The NBA does it with flopping, it's not difficult at all and msut be done as soon as possible to stop and punish divers.
 
Last edited:
In my opinion, giving a penalty is rewarding a team with a clear goal scoring chance. Therefore, inside should only be yellow, since the goal scoring chance is already compensated by giving a penalty. Outside the box, there is no clear goal scoring chance, hence it should be compensated by giving a red card.
 
Damjan said:
In my opinion, giving a penalty is rewarding a team with a clear goal scoring chance. Therefore, inside should only be yellow, since the goal scoring chance is already compensated by giving a penalty. Outside the box, there is no clear goal scoring chance, hence it should be compensated by giving a red card.
Click to expand...
I totally agree.
It should be as simple as that.
 
drekkard said:
So:


1- Yes, defenders should try to stop an attacker by fair means. Tackling or going to the ground it's a clear attempt of bringing down the man if he doesn't touch the ball, so... If it's the last man, don't bring it down with a risky move. Demichelis had lost position and Messi was through on an open goal situation. If Demichelis decides to tackle he knows what he's risking, it's his fault. Defend better. Try to stop Messi without bringing him down.
Click to expand...

Of course the defender tries to defend without breaking the rules - but come on. If the striker plants a foot a fraction of an inch wrong, he bobbles the ball, it goes out for a goal kick. A defender does similarly and it's a penalty, red card and suspension? That's ridiculous imo.

Agree with the others, if it's a penalty it should be a yellow card - except for massive abuse of the rules (Suarez v Ghana etc)
 
a healthy bvb would dismantle zenit. but they're losing another starter each week.

olympiakos can beat united, though.
 
Zenit scored, 1st home team goal in this stage of CL and that was offside too!

Glad Dortmund it's winning , Zenit doesn't deserve to be at this sage of CL, while teams like Napoli are out , UEFA should work more on this.
 
Haha penalty ? What a disgrace , seems like Putin has payed a lot of money ;)
2 non existing goals

But fuck toy ref and Zenit , 4-2 now , you can suck it
 
BhWGx-1IQAERpbb.jpg:large
 
In the Man Utd one of the posters reflects on the results of the English teams and what this says about the strength of the EPL.

I've never been sure that the EPL was the best league in the world, but now i am. This is a good and competitive league compared to others: La Liga is a two club league (and i hope Atletico will prove me wrong, but i have my doubts), Bayern dominates the Bundesliga, Juventus is currently too strong for Serie A (and i f you look how good Taraabt does, that speaks volumes about the strength of Serie A) and PSG dominates Ligue 1.

The EPL is very competitive and that may be one of the reasons why English clubs seem to do less good this year (although it is too soon to conclude things, they might turn things around in the second leg, imo only Arsenal face a hopeless situation). Clubs like Bayern and PSG can rest players, English clubs don't have that luxury because the league is very competitive.

I see two other reasons: English clubs play too much football. (stop with the League Cup). Look how knackered a player like Özil is currently.

But the main reasons are the refs. The English FA should reflect about the way English referees applythe rules of the games. Challenge that results in yellow or red cards everywhere in Europe are not even seen as fouls in England. This is the reason why English clubs have comparatively lots of sending offs. The fact that English internationals are even more protected is also a big disadvantage for the national team. Players like Gerrard and Rooney come away with the most reckless challenges...this isn't the case on the continent. I predict red cards for the England team in the WC. And there will be outrage among the English fans whereas continental fans will agree with the sending off.

It is time to reflect on the refereeing standards but also about the way the rules are applied in the EPL.
 
I agree we play too much football. The europeans all have a winter break also so they are less likely to be tired and suffer injuries before the CL knockouts start up.

This is something we could change. Personally I love Christmas/New Years football but I think it can be tuned down a bit. Playing like 3 games in 5 days is overkill.

I also agree about the refereeing standards/rules harming us but I'd rather we get harmed in Europe than harm our league by making it pretty much a no-contact sport like some leagues. The freeflowing, swashbuckling nature of football here is what makes it the biggest league on the planet.

Despite the lack of help our teams get from the FA and the differences in refereeing, PL clubs have done very well in the CL over the last decade or so.
 
Godotelli said:
I agree we play too much football. The europeans all have a winter break also so they are less likely to be tired and suffer injuries before the CL knockouts start up.

This is something we could change. Personally I love Christmas/New Years football but I think it can be tuned down a bit. Playing like 3 games in 5 days is overkill.

I also agree about the refereeing standards/rules harming us but I'd rather we get harmed in Europe than harm our league by making it pretty much a no-contact sport like some leagues. The freeflowing, swashbuckling nature of football here is what makes it the biggest league on the planet.

Despite the lack of help our teams get from the FA and the differences in refereeing, PL clubs have done very well in the CL over the last decade or so.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this, especially about changing the standard of refs in the UK as it might make English clubs do better in the CL. The PL's degree of physicality makes it fairly unique and interesting to watch. Is it worth changing this on the off-chance it might lead to an improvement? It might be better to try and get the players to be a bit more conservative in going to ground when they play in Europe. Most PL teams play alter their tactics to a degree in Europe, if the players can cope with different tactics they should (in time) be able to adjust their game and take less risks in the tackle.

Also maybe we are reading too much into things. The player who committed the big foul in the City game was De Michelis, who has only played around 10 games so far for city, before that the bulk of his career was in La Liga and the Bundesliga. Can he really have changed his game that much after 10 or so matches? Isn't it maybe more likely that in an intense game he made a slight error of judgement that any player from any league could have made? We are probably reading too much into this "the Premier League is weak" train of thought. Arsenal did well to get out of one of the hardest groups in the history of the CL (Dortmund and Napoli as 3rd and 4th seeds is beyond crazy) Man City were a goal (and a manager with a calculator) away from finishing above last years Champions. But both of these teams finished second and both faced difficult knockout draws because of this, so far the 1st place teams have had the beating of the second place teams in the knockouts and maybe that is more indicative than the leagues the teams come from. The exception is Man Utd, who lost to a runner up last night, but they are in crisis mode this season.

It looks like 3 of the 4 English teams will go out at this stage. But 2 of the 4 German teams look like going out at the same stage(Leverkusen and possibly Schalke) and 1 of the 4 Spanish teams (Sociedad) finished bottom (not even 3rd and into the Europa) of a group that maybe, in hindsight, wasnt that difficult. France has one of it's teams pretty much already in the quarters (PSG) but the other two didn't make it to the knockouts, Italy again only had 1 of 3 teams in the knockouts.
 
Oh dear...it's already time for Schalke 0:4...seems that only Bayern and the BVB will make it to next round. And that wasn't luck for the opponents, it was completely deserved for them to loose.
 
Madrid are fatal....simply perfect performance.... this is total destruction.

i feel sorry for Schalke, especially because the great fans..

now it´s 1:6...
 
Real were miles ahead of Schalke, totally deserved, even with that result. And respect to the Schalke fans, great support, reminded me of the Irish at the 2012 EC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom