Fair enough.
Player Watch Player Watch: Guglielmo Vicario
- Thread starter THFCSPURS19
- Start date
Fair enough.
luRRka
Well-Known Member
- Jul 27, 2008
- 3,664
- 15,534
FYI -
Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.
A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.
Aleks
Well-Known Member
- Aug 18, 2012
- 1,335
- 7,004
This was what VAR said about the Diaz goal the other night:
VAR review: We've seen a handful of situations recently where there has been contact between an attacking player and a goalkeeper before a goal.
On each occasion the VAR has chosen not to overrule the decision of the referee, an outcome backed up by the Premier League's Independent Key Match Incidents Panel.
Consistency is about the point of the VAR intervention, rather than the final decision.
So they've just stopped caring about this type of situation and it's totally cool now even if the ref doesn't see it
VAR review: We've seen a handful of situations recently where there has been contact between an attacking player and a goalkeeper before a goal.
On each occasion the VAR has chosen not to overrule the decision of the referee, an outcome backed up by the Premier League's Independent Key Match Incidents Panel.
Consistency is about the point of the VAR intervention, rather than the final decision.
So they've just stopped caring about this type of situation and it's totally cool now even if the ref doesn't see it
There is actually a move before doing that, if blocked on the line yoy need to step away from thr line, metre off at least, then as the ball is about to be struck, push opponent away, steo back to create your space...
This is 100% targetted by teams, vicario isnt on the physically stronger side of keepers, more of the de gea build.
McFlash
In the corner, eating crayons.
- Oct 19, 2005
- 12,896
- 46,120
I said the same after the City one, Vic needs to be shoving the man and calling the refs attention to the problem.
Either that or going down before the kick is taken, something to bring the refs attention to him.
Putting a defender in between them could help but it could also be risky in regards to penalties if the defender is seen to be pushing his opponent down, say the oppo player takes a bit of a dive.
I think the problem is that the game has become too over-reffed, too complicated and var also has to shoulder some of the blame. The officials seem to wait on decisions at times, relying on var sorting things out for them.
They've managed to make a simple game far too complicated and nobody knows what the fuck is happening anymore.
spurs9
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2012
- 11,893
- 34,370
I haven't seen the game or goals, so have no opinion my self but when City had a goal disallowed v Liverpool for a foul on Alisson, Dermot Gallagher said:
"They say goalkeepers are over protected, but you only have to knock him slightly off balance and he has lost all stability, he can't catch the ball - he loses the ball and knocks him enough off balance to give a foul."
So the question is, was there enough contact to slightly knock Vicario off balance? If the answer is yes, it should be a foul.
Brilliant that we’ve got a situation where referees ignore fouls because VAR can overturn them, and VAR ignores fouls because the referee chose to allow them.
spurs9
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2012
- 11,893
- 34,370
Yeah, VAR was supposed to make decisions more consistent, but the opposite has happened.
If it's just going with the onfield decision despite the evidence showing the opposite, what is the point of if?
Time to scrap it IMO, it's taking away from the game but adding nothing.
Bluto Blutarsky
Well-Known Member
- Mar 4, 2021
- 15,170
- 70,683
It is actually obstruction when you shepherd the ball out - if you are not in position to play the ball.
Per the laws of the game:
IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF AN OPPONENT WITHOUT CONTACT
Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.
A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.
The above would be an indirect kick - note that the players can line-up around the keeper, and as long as they don't move - that is not impeding, but if they move with the keeper - that should be an indirect free kick.
The below is defined as a direct kick:
- impedes an opponent with contact
beats1
Well-Known Member
- Feb 22, 2010
- 30,026
- 29,600
I know but there seems to be a decision made to move all 11 players in to the box, something I don't understand
We have been consistently poor from set pieces, i.e. free kicks ever since the Chelsea match. Villa were killing us with their set pieces
Also worth noting that, statistically teams don't take as many corners in to the box as before and instead go for the short corner before
fishhhandaricecake
Well-Known Member
- Nov 15, 2018
- 19,252
- 48,142
Mabye a slight weakness at corners but at the same time he’s being blocked off and the refs are doing nothing about it.
He’s been phenomenal all season so not a big issue for me, it’s more an issue that refs aren’t doing anything to help protect him.
He’s been phenomenal all season so not a big issue for me, it’s more an issue that refs aren’t doing anything to help protect him.
agrdavidsfan
Ledley's Knee!
- Aug 25, 2005
- 10,918
- 13,352
It wasn't a foul but it shouldnt happen
gibbospurs
SC Supporter
- Aug 28, 2010
- 4,986
- 6,608
He needs to work on this now. As it’s gonna happen every game now. Also he’s gonna need a bit of help. Not really rocket science, whoever is sat on him needs a player sat in front.
Misfit
President of The Niles Crane Fanclub
- May 7, 2006
- 21,243
- 34,895
People, especially football refs and officials are morons. Introducing tech on top of that was always going to have unintended, negative consequences.
jackson
SC Supporter
- Jan 27, 2006
- 1,264
- 2,980
I thought from as early as the arsenal game he looked vulnerable at corners but seemed to not be targeted again until city game. He'll learn to deal with it better, keepers new to the PL quite often struggle with crosses/corners in their first season. De Gea was very weak in his first season.
Problem in the mean time is there's literally no downside to teams fouling him at every opportunity, at worst they concede a freekick, rarely given yellows.
Problem in the mean time is there's literally no downside to teams fouling him at every opportunity, at worst they concede a freekick, rarely given yellows.
Cornpattbuck
Well-Known Member
- Jul 23, 2013
- 6,932
- 16,035
The first goal was bullshit. Reverse Six Nations. They literally stuck a player there to dig his heels in and back into the goaly. Isn't usually allowed and shouldn't have been today. Still, we should have just fucked them really, hey?! 
mil1lion
This is the place to be
- May 7, 2004
- 42,493
- 78,070
They shouldn't scrap var but they should just use it for offside and to check for handball. Fouls should always be down to the ref because they're an interpretation of the rule. It's not something you need var to be involved with. The ref clearly sees the incident and for some reason allows it. Just poor officiating.
Similar threads
