What's new

Dangerous play.

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,392
I don't understand how Diego Costa's goal against Swansea is not dangerous play. His overhead kick narrowly missed connecting squarely in Kyle Naughton's face and could easily have caused very serious injury. Anywhere else on the pitch it would have been penalised. This is nothing to do with my hatred for Chelsea and Costa in particular but is about a safety issue.
 

Gassin's finest

C'est diabolique
May 12, 2010
37,355
87,831
I don't understand how Diego Costa's goal against Swansea is not dangerous play. His overhead kick narrowly missed connecting squarely in Kyle Naughton's face and could easily have caused very serious injury. Anywhere else on the pitch it would have been penalised. This is nothing to do with my hatred for Chelsea and Costa in particular but is about a safety issue.
22.jpg
 

Gb160

Well done boys. Good process
Jun 20, 2012
23,646
93,315
I don't understand how Diego Costa's goal against Swansea is not dangerous play. His overhead kick narrowly missed connecting squarely in Kyle Naughton's face and could easily have caused very serious injury. Anywhere else on the pitch it would have been penalised. This is nothing to do with my hatred for Chelsea and Costa in particular but is about a safety issue.
I thought exactly the same with Koscielny's goal for the scum.
Very close to taking off a defenders head.
 

easley91

Well-Known Member
Jan 27, 2011
18,721
53,768
But it's clear their intentions were to hit the ball, which they both did hit the ball. A bicycle kick goal would never stand if it's always deemed dangerous play. I don't like either player, but they both went for the ball with no intention to hit the defenders and neither contacted with a defender.
 

jurgen

Busy ****
Jul 5, 2008
6,711
17,170
Start penalising anyone who attempts it near a defender and the game would be significantly poorer. With Costa the concern should be more that he can dive in on goalkeepers studs up and get away with it due to weak referees - his general demeanour and what he gets away with is a much bigger issue than the overhead kick in my opinion.
 

talkshowhost86

Mod-Moose
Staff
Oct 2, 2004
48,105
47,061
It's a weird one because if anyone had done that on any other area of the pitch (i.e. raised foot) then it would be a free-kick but apparently when it's a goalscoring situation it doesn't count as a foul.

I don't really see how it's different just because it's an attempt on goal.

But outlawing it would take away the chance of seeing some great goals.
 

Gb160

Well done boys. Good process
Jun 20, 2012
23,646
93,315
Start penalising anyone who attempts it near a defender and the game would be significantly poorer. With Costa the concern should be more that he can dive in on goalkeepers studs up and get away with it due to weak referees - his general demeanour and what he gets away with is a much bigger issue than the overhead kick in my opinion.
This is what I don't understand, in previous seasons it was penalised if a defender was close, yet that's twice in a weekend it's been let go so maybe it's something the refs have been advised to go easier on?
i fully agree with u on Costa though.
 

Dougal

Staff
Jun 4, 2004
60,346
129,923
I think using Chelsea and Arsenal as examples shows an unfair bias. Perhaps if we used one of our own players we could demonstrate a completely fair judgement on this kind of challenge. Here's our very own Tobes...

image.jpg


The dirty Belgian bastards! I blame the ex-Gooner next to him for being a bad influence. Cheating Dirty Arsenal Bastards! And fuck you Costa!
 

DIEHARD

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2004
4,659
5,443
I was about to post something abiut this.

Im sorry but that was a good goal and if kane had scored it and it got disallowed we would be up in arms. Koscielnys was also very good.

We are in danger of eliminating overhead and bycicle kicks. The ball was there to be hit. The swansea player was behind costa rather than the player oncoming so less dangerous. Same as the arsenal one.
 

LexingtonSpurs

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2013
13,456
39,042
I think using Chelsea and Arsenal as examples shows an unfair bias. Perhaps if we used one of our own players we could demonstrate a completely fair judgement on this kind of challenge. Here's our very own Tobes...

View attachment 25226

The dirty Belgian bastards! I blame the ex-Gooner next to him for being a bad influence. Cheating Dirty Arsenal Bastards! And fuck you Costa!
Not Toby's fault the guy was standing with head right next to Toby's boot....:whistle:
 

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,392
It's a weird one because if anyone had done that on any other area of the pitch (i.e. raised foot) then it would be a free-kick but apparently when it's a goalscoring situation it doesn't count as a foul.

I don't really see how it's different just because it's an attempt on goal.

But outlawing it would take away the chance of seeing some great goals.


I agree with you, but I think it's unfair on defenders to expect them to put their head into situations where they could easily lose all of their teeth. There seems to be a disparity where forwards and goalkeepers are over protected but defenders are expected to put up with it. Naughton actually got kicked in the head on this occasion but didn't make a fuss. Having your foot at head height is penalised anywhere else on the pitch.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
39,837
50,713
I said the same in the premier league thread, both goals should have been disallowed, no question at all. I think Jerome had a much less obvious one disallowed last season when the defender's head was nowhere near as close.

Just because it's a "crowd pleaser" doesn't mean you suspend a very clear rule and both were bloody dangerous to the defenders.
 
Top