inclineyid
Well-Known Member
- Dec 5, 2006
- 618
- 1,402
Keeper wasnt getting to it anyway, liked that decision
Premier League 2023/2024
- Thread starter TheChosenOne
- Start date
DenverSpur
Well-Known Member
- Sep 25, 2011
- 2,066
- 5,741
For God’s sake it’s called obstruction. He’s not going for the ball, he’s not standing his ground, he looked around to see where the GK was and then stepped into him. That’s about as clear and obvious a deliberate foul as you’ll ever see. That happened on the halfway line and it’s a free kick every time.
Everybody who’s saying it’s the correct decision; hand on heart what would your reaction be if that goal had been given against us? I’m betting you’d be going apeshit.
Last edited:
TheChosenOne
A dislike or neg rep = fat fingers
- Dec 13, 2005
- 48,204
- 50,253
- Thread starter
- #11,426
Saturday PL
.
.
ernie78
Well-Known Member
- Jun 13, 2012
- 7,362
- 15,487
I think there was definitely a case of he saw the keeper and made sure he stood his ground & wasn’t going to be pushed out the way.
Seems to be a belief that players need to disappear as soon as a keeper comes for the ball
Johnny J
Not the Kiwi you need but the one you deserve
- Aug 18, 2012
- 18,751
- 49,382
Not really a good test, because almost every fan will be biased in favour of decisions going for their club rather than against.Everybody who’s saying it’s the correct decision; hand on heart what would your reaction be if that goal had been given against us? I’m betting you’d be going apeshit.
easley91
Well-Known Member
- Jan 27, 2011
- 19,220
- 55,115
It looked deliberate to me.
RuskyM
Well-Known Member
- Jul 9, 2011
- 7,229
- 23,870
I think he keeps his job and gets them back up next season tbh.
Marty
Audere est farce
- Mar 10, 2005
- 40,310
- 64,384
Does that matter?
Standing your ground and getting run into should be fine in my eyes. It's if he makes a delberate movement into the path of the keeper that would make it punishable.
tommo84
Proud to be loud
- Aug 15, 2005
- 6,238
- 11,321
I thought it was a foul as the Luton player appears to turn his back in anticipation of the impact having made no attempt to challenge for the ball. In my mind that makes it a deliberate movement and is therefore obstruction. Given how quickly refs give free kicks for any contact with the ‘keeper 99% of the time I’m staggered that wasn’t disallowed.
TheChosenOne
A dislike or neg rep = fat fingers
- Dec 13, 2005
- 48,204
- 50,253
- Thread starter
- #11,435
The two Fulham teams = "The Battle Of Fulham Broadway"
Marty
Audere est farce
- Mar 10, 2005
- 40,310
- 64,384
Fulham have a diabolical record at Chelsea so I don't have much hope.
Well, yes, that's what makes it obstruction, right?
And he isn't just "standing his ground," he looks at the keeper and backs into him. He even shoves his butt out to give him a little push.
I guess I'm ok with VAR:s decision. The keeper goes down very easily and I don't think it's that clear and obvious. I do however think the ref should have caught it, because what is obvious, to me, is that he very purposefully obstructed the keeper.
Marty
Audere est farce
- Mar 10, 2005
- 40,310
- 64,384
Poorly phrased by me, sorry.
For me deliberately standing still should be OK, but the movement towards the keeper is a potential offence. That's why using the word deliberate is a bit inaccurate to me.
only1waddle
Well-Known Member
- Jun 18, 2012
- 8,242
- 12,521
Fulham looking a bit lethargic and that defense is shaky, Willian still class though.
Similar threads
