- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Matchday 1/18
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:33 pm to TFTC
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:33 pm to TFTC
quote:
Going off the NFL rule for replay, I doubt it would be reversed since Guzan's leg does roll on Suarez's foot... That said, I admit it was soft and could see it not being called..
I thought it was a mistake by Guzan to go to ground, as Suarez was moving away from goal on his weaker side. Guzan had covering defenders as well. A situation like that is straight up too close to call, and though it was a soft penalty, I can see it going both ways.
There are situations where it's not a dive and not a penalty either. Just a play.
1
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:33 pm to TheOcean
quote:
It's far too arbitrary to say that was definitely a dive.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:35 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
There are situations where it's not a dive and not a penalty either. Just a play.
Like the bs penalty we got against, I think West Brom, in stoppage time earlier this year to keep Jose's home unbeaten streak alive.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:36 pm to TheOcean
quote:
Problem with retroactive penalties in those situations is that there was contact. It's far too arbitrary to say that was definitely a dive
There have been clearer dives by Suarez in the past. This situation I'm comfortable letting the referee decide in the spur of the moment. There may or may not have been contact, but the presence of Guzan was enough to put Suarez off his stride to say that falling down could have been a reasonable expectation of the continuation of the play, but that by itself doesn't deserve a penalty in my view.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:38 pm to TheOcean
I think the only way retroactive penalties could work is if they are for dives where no contact was visible. It would be too subjective to measure how influential the body contact was for an alleged dive.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:39 pm to RandySavage
quote:
Like the bs penalty we got against, I think West Brom, in stoppage time earlier this year to keep Jose's home unbeaten streak alive.
Was that when Ramires went down? Sometimes referees make mistakes, and sometimes they are influenced by the run of play, or by the home crowd. If we have a retroactive committee that can review these things, I think the inclination of the ref would be to call the penalty every time, because in essence we are subsidizing their mistake. They can afford to be wrong. Maybe I'm thinking about this the wrong way.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:41 pm to crazy4lsu
Yea it was the "foul" on Ramires.
But if the punishment is severe enough players aren't going to put the refs in that position nearly as often.
But if the punishment is severe enough players aren't going to put the refs in that position nearly as often.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:47 pm to RandySavage
There has to be balance. The fact that this is probably going to be a major controversy is testament to the fact that people are getting fed up with it. But in my thinking, I see this as more a case of the big team vs little team. If AV was playing Stoke at the Britannia, would Probert have made the same call?
This post was edited on 1/18/14 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:47 pm to Oizers
quote:
. It would be too subjective to measure how influential the body contact was for an alleged dive.
Ding ding ding.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:53 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
This situation I'm comfortable letting the referee decide in the spur of the moment. There may or may not have been contact, but the presence of Guzan was enough to put Suarez off his stride to say that falling down could have been a reasonable expectation of the continuation of the play, but that by itself doesn't deserve a penalty in my view.
if any argument can be made is the ref was not in the position to make that call if it was a pk or a dive warrant enough to yellow luis and in that case swallow the whistle.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:54 pm to TheOcean
No, it's not. Maybe 1 in a 100 might be questionable but you can pretty much always tell a dive from a legit fall just in the way a person goes down. Add video replay to the mix and it's a no brainer. The 1% of people who might get screwed by it does not outweigh the massive improvement it would have on the game.
And again, just the threat of retroactive punishment is going to cut down on a huge number of the questionable incidents anyway.
And again, just the threat of retroactive punishment is going to cut down on a huge number of the questionable incidents anyway.
This post was edited on 1/18/14 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 1/18/14 at 1:58 pm to RandySavage
So, if you are a strong player with a low center of gravity, but you are fouled and can stay on your feet... do you stay on your feet? Is it a dive if you don't? Will you not get the call if you don't go to ground?
Posted on 1/18/14 at 2:05 pm to TFTC
What a goal by Juve... Pogba to Vidal... 
Posted on 1/18/14 at 2:29 pm to TFTC
quote:
So, if you are a strong player with a low center of gravity, but you are fouled and can stay on your feet... do you stay on your feet? Is it a dive if you don't? Will you not get the call if you don't go to ground?
To me diving and going down easy are different. Neither are desirable but diving is much worse imo. For me if a player can stay on his feet he should stay on his feet though even I'll grant that isn't very realistic and refs being too stupid to call fouls just because a player doesn't fall down is the reason. Eden Hazard is a prime example of a player who doesn't really dive but goes down far too easily a lot of times.
I don't think it is unrealistic or asking too much though for a player not to fly through the air when there is clearly no contact made.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 2:49 pm to RandySavage
quote:
Eden Hazard is a prime example of a player who doesn't really dive but goes down far too easily a lot of times
You see, I believe this defines Suarez... 99% of the times he goes down is by contact, hence he has very few cards for diving... maybe 2 at LFC...
i think what hurts him is the embellishing (which I admit is tiresome), but I find this inherent in most South American players...
Anyway, Im sure you'll disagree... but I must turn my attention to going to another, assuringly disappointing, Pelicans game...
Posted on 1/18/14 at 3:07 pm to TFTC
quote:
embellishing
Which is the ultimate sin, imo. Worse even than diving.
quote:
but I must turn my attention to going to another, assuringly disappointing, Pelicans game...
That deserves respect.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 3:30 pm to RandySavage
How about instead of making a game altering decision in the spur of the moment they implement a feature where the booth quickly looks at multiple angles (don't say this can't happen quickly, they showed us about 3 angles while the people were still circling/arguing with the ref) and decides what it was. The ball was out of play anyways, just take 30 damn seconds and get it right.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 3:38 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
Would rather that than continue to have multiple soccer matches ruined/effected by referees.
Posted on 1/18/14 at 4:41 pm to RandySavage
Stan fricking Collymore
Posted on 1/18/14 at 5:39 pm to engvol
He's just mad cause Liverpool fans pointed out how he beat his ol lady!
Page 9 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News