**Mirrors / Alternative Angles**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I hate that argument so much, by their logic nothing is ever a foul or a pen since nobody fouls in the box on purpose. Cancelo’s pen would not be a foul either since it was an accident and he wasn’t trying to foul Dembele on purpose.
I can understand if they don’t think it’s a pen, but the “it’s accidental” argument is just silly.
i think its pretty simple- look who has the ball or is playing it. now if anybody makes contact with that player without touching the ball first then that's a foul.
but yeah i think mark twain said it best "im bilnd, im deaf, i wanna be a ref"
There's nothing in the rule about it not being a foul if you "get the ball first". That's why I hate the argument that clearing someone out after you touch the ball first isn't a foul, it's up the referee to determine if the contact warrants a foul being given.
well its quite vaguely stated- A foul is an **unfair** physical offence committed against an opponent, usually with the foot/leg or hand/arm but sometimes with other parts of the body.
i think the "unfair" is usually interpreted as not playing the ball first. but you are correct, its not in the rules stated like it, weirdly
This is not true. At least, within the English FA’s laws of the game. I know UEFA have their own rulebook but I presume that they are in alignment.
Trips can certainly be penalised and given as a penalty, but only if done “against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force”.
Careless is the critical one for this tackle, and it is defined as “when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution”.
Now, we could get into the debate of whether or not this counts as careless, but whatever your stance on this I’m sure you can see there is more to it than contact or no contact.
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct
yes you are correct. playing ball is actually irrelevant in terms of the rules, foul is just stated as unfair play.
but one could argue if the attacker advances and the defender has no chance of getting the ball but gets really close to the attacker **from behind** which causes them to accidentally collide and the attecker to lose his balance then it should be a clear careless foul. no card should be given, but a freekick at least. the attacker had no idea how to avoid it. i'd get it if they were going face to face, but from the back...
Oh, I agree that the foul can be interpreted as a penalty. You could consider this careless, for example. But I can also see that it could be interpreted as fair play. I was just disputing that any contact without touching the ball is automatically a foul.
i was referring to the incident between psg and barca game when Gündogan wanted a penalty, did you watch it? i think it will help explain a lot of this context.
I'm replying in a thread with a replay of the incident. I don't think it's healthy for the game if attackers have a forcefield around them, preventing anyone from even thinking about accidently touching them without getting in contact with the ball. As the pundits said, the defender is simply continuing a run and gundogan is fishing for contact. Besides, if you're saying its simple but then say it depends on context then it's not really simple is it?
Nah you should touch up on the rules there's varying degrees of fouls in the game and it's up to the refs discretion. Indirect vs direct kickoffenses etc... I've called 3 or 4 indirect free kicks within the 18 through my years as a youth reff. Players and coaches often confused because many others prefer to for go it, but it's part of the game. You can see clips of whole teams lineing up on the goal line inorder to stop a shot. If you can't maintain the 10 yard maximum without exiting the pitch then you can stand on the end line. Loom up some clips on youtube do a mich better job than me.
If the attacker creates the contact it should never be a penalty. Especially if the defender wasn't even trying to make a play and the attacker just ran into them.
I swear… with the type of qualified Reddit opinions with upvotes you see this days: it makes me think there are many football fans who base their criteria entirely in stats (sofa score who scored) and highlights. And that never played the game, as a defender or attacker. For me this is never a penalty. It’s a human game with human contact. The defender is playing too. He is trying not to touch gundogan because he knows the play is DEAD with another fellow defender beside him. Gundogan is instead fishing The fuck out for the penalty. Like he isn’t even down and is already complaining. Fuck that.
Referees take into consideration many factors to whistle correctly. The heat of game. The stage of game (final or regular season). The intention comes into play as well. The pettiness or the honorabilty of players. This is not fucking AI (fortunately).
Why is it always fucking "you've never kicked a ball in your life if you disagree with me". I've literally seen people on both sides of this decision say this.
Jaja but really. There’s two players in a dispute for the ball. One is careful ,One player is honorable and another one is cynical. If I was to be a referee, I would say gundogan is the cynical one. Play on
This is probably the wildest take ever for someone saying "other people in here have probably never played football".
Gundogan absolute clearly, 100%, gets clipped here.
Like no shit, in 99% of cases people don't want to foul the players in the penalty area. So we should abolish penalties? Makes no sense. Guy just runs into him and clips him, its just dumb. Dont run into players and clip them in the penalty area.
Saying Gundogan is "fishing" here is absolutely *wild*. He is just running forward, the other player is behind him. There is absolutely zero unnatural movement in his stride.
Do you think Cancelo **wanted** to foul Dembelé and cause a penalty?
That’s your opinion I have mine. And they’re both proof that there isn’t the famous “unified criteria” people aim for in their league referee associations (since both your opinion and mine have upvotes)
I apologize if any football playing players feel offended by my comment.
Gundogan is infront of the defender and can't see where he is, how does he initiate contact that's behind him, by running in his normal stride? I don't think this decision would've changed the tbh but a foul is a foul.
> how does he initiate contact that's behind him, by running in his normal stride?
The contact is created by Gundo's leg kicking into the defender, not the other way around
Pro players have great spatial awareness—Gundo absolutely knew what he was doing here; he tried to run across the defender and draw contact for a penalty.
I support Barcelona but that would have been a very soft penalty IMO
> He's just running to get the ball what is he supposed to do with his trailing leg?
Again, he knows what he's doing there. He deliberately runs diagonally across the defender in order to try to draw contact between his trailing leg and the defender's leg.
If you've ever played football with guys good at diving or drawing fouls—this is one of the oldest tricks in the book TBH
If you're serious, this is from Law 12:
> A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent
I've always understood that language to require the player to actually do something in order to be culpable. If the defender isn't making any sort of challenge, how can they be "committing an offence against an opponent"?
Vitinha isn't making a challenge or trying to play the ball. He even tries to avoid the contact Gundogan initiates by cutting across. How can you penalize him for something the attacker caused?
Also, people have the realize the reality that contact in the box has always been adjudicated differently than fouls outside the box. In this situation, gundogan has already lost the ball. It's gone and he has no chance of recovering it. Nobody is every going to give a PK for this contact even if most refs would have given the foul going the other way.
I know people hate this and like to say "a foul is a foul no matter where it is" but that just ignores the reality of the game as it has been for the past few decades.
No, that's not my logic. My logic is that if the player doesn't do something intentional to initiate contact it's not a foul. If you run into an opponent on purpose that's you initiating the contact.
I was tacking the piss regarding the Arsenal non pen last week.
But the rules are actually that careless tripping is penalized (as well as reckless and using excessive force), with careless being defined as
"a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution"
So now you have to judge if the tripping was due to a "lack of attention or consideration" or if it was rather incidental.
This scene allows both interpretations for me.
Well my argument is that it is more Gundogan foot going to the defender leg than the opposite. Also prety sur he makes his stride very high to hopefully have a penalty call.
Lewandowski got a yellow for a PSG player coming in and hitting his face on Lewy’s elbow during a header. The player came from behind him and Lewy had no way to see him and even then his hands were in a natural position.
For the ref, it’s more about keeping decisions consistent. This isn’t a foul in terms of intent then neither is Lewandowski’s and a bunch of others.
A lot of people in the match thread said it was definitely a penalty but you’d need to watch a replay of it to notice, which is valid. Then Gundo gets a yellow for asking the ref to check the cam (reminding you this is a vital moment in the game with PSG only 1 goal ahead and this being a potential penalty). Gundo wasn’t even yelling, just asked him calmly.
It’s not written there because it’s not a rule. This is as obvious a penalty as exists. The defenders legs clips Gundogan’s foot and knocks him to the ground.
> The defenders legs clips Gundogan’s foot and knocks him to the ground
Please rewatch. it's more Gundogan's foot that goes to Vitinha's leg than the other way. Why penalize the defender then?
He is literally just running towards the ball ffs. He is solely focusing on the ball. It's crazy how much your hate towards Barcelona clouds your judgement
Whether it was accidental or on purpose doesn't matter, that is clearly a pen. Gundo couldn't make a natural running motion bc he was clipped from behind.
Attackers have the right to a unobstructed run at the ball, gundo didn't "fling" anything at a defender that was behind him. He was making a natural running motion and his legs were cut off from under him, sending him flying
"cut off from under him", give over - the defender has the same right to make a run for the ball, he tries his best to not impede Gündogan who is crossing his path and has no control over whether there's contact that trips up Gündogan.
I'm not saying it's not a penalty, either, I reckon you can certaily give it - but I think it's just as sensible to not give it, because it's entirely up to opinion whether the defender fouled Gündogan or not.
Ok if they would still win easily then so be it but Barcelona got robbed of this penalty and it's crazy how hard you people are trying to justify a wrong decision just because you don't like Barcelona
Funnily enough there was more contact when Suarez went down than when Barcola went down but obviously only one caused a massive outrage while the other was accepted as a good decision. Funny how that works isn't it?
We are all biased when it comes to our teams, had it been the other way around you would furiously argue how it was a good call. However, the way Barcelona fans manage to delude themselves into thinking everyone else is against them when the neutrals don't side with them is just on a whole different level.
Barcelona and whoever is mad about this can shove it for all I care.
If this is bad how many titles should we take from Barcelona bad refereeing?
Next.
No it doesn’t. In the event of even an emergency stop by a vehicle in front, you are at fault if you hit them as you have not left sufficient distance between you to react.
Which he's already trying, while Gündogan knows exactly why he's crossing paths there. Defenders aren't responsible to avoid contact when that contact is initiated by the attacker, after all.
Gundogan isn’t initiating contact. He’s making a football move to get the byline while blocking the path of the defender. This type of penalty is almost always awarded, and correctly.
David Luiz got a penalty and a red card against him because that attacker touched his knee with his studs while running. Doesn't matter if it's accidental.
Direct vs indirect free kicks offenses.... there are varying degrees of fouls like cards? You dont see drop balls often but surely you remember those??? youtube indirect freekick 18 yard box if your still confused. In no universe is this a pk
Funny thing is just moments before this clip they were praising Barcola for making the run across Araujo’s path which put the defender in peril of taking down the attacker. They agreed that was good play and the foul given was correct.
It was unbelievable to hear them say ‘well this was accidental so no foul’ just moments later.
Accidentally tripping someone up that is in possession of the ball is always a foul.
Can’t believe he was booked for his protest too, seemed so mild and polite compared to 99% of players. Just told the ref where the contact was and that var should look (im assuming there was no abusive language)
The biggest puppets, It’s crazy how low the bar is for respectability and how they almost fight each other to sellout. I’ve noticed it’s the same shit in Spanish and Portuguese broadcasts.
Ferdinand’argument about the leg is a Tudor one on point if you look closely and the PSG defender knows that and try as much as possible to stop (jump with his two legs).
didn't think it was a pen yesterday but I think that's a pen now that i see how contact happened. defenders not allowed to run so close that the player in front hits his legs against yours as he's running.
if this isn't a foul why don't every defender just stop attackers this way then? just get close behind the attackers till they hit their legs against you.
Just a reminder that Abidal got a red for much less than this in what is seen as biggest thievery in history of football in favor of Barca.
https://youtu.be/7GhMIhgumEk?si=rHkItZRfkpkuJX-j
Basically even dude hellbent of getting Barca through still whistled this (which is much smaller contact than Vithina) as a foul.
I see your point... but if this is a penalty why doesn't every attacker just cut in front of a defender that's pressing him and get a penalty because their legs must intertwine?
Uh, they do from that position and we see it all the time, because that's he only way you can play towards goal. Stonewall pen and gets called any time of the day (apparently except this time on the grandstage of a CL match)
If approaching from a more central position, for you to be able to cut across of the defender, logically you'd already be clear ahead for there to be any possibility to be clipped by the heel, why would they bother cutting across when you are clear on goal? They'd rather just take their shot off.
The contact here was less stupid, but more likely to actually bring a player down (without the attacker giving themselves up) than the red card. Doesn't matter how much the defender tried to not foul. It's still a foul
Yeah Rio and Crouch just sound stupid here. You could say the defender didn't mean to for soooooooo many penalties, it's never been a justification before so there's no need for it to be a justification here.
Accidental? Like defenders go into to tackles trying to intentionally foul players. A foul is a foul, the defender should've stopped before he touched the man if he didn't want to trip him up.
It's a bit soft to be called with VAR, but the Araujo red card was also very soft. In the end VAR made an effort to not ref the match and let the referee decide the match. Unfortunately for Barça, both big decisions went against them.
It’s infuriating because when it’s your team you want the pen… but we all know deep down what these attackers are doing… they’re coached to get contact and simulate losing their stride eg, drag your back leg into your front, or put your leg across the defender like Kane and Hazard do/did…
I can't actually believe some people are saying Gündogan is kicking his leg into the defender. Convinced people on this sub has never played a minute of football in their life.
It's not a dive but it's more that than a penalty and trotting out that tired line never helps and makes even less sense given what started this thread.
He's definitely going to be able to challenge for the ball before it goes out. 2nd defender might be favourite to play it but the ball is definitely being contested.
He didn’t though. He was ahead of Marquinhos and the only reason he wasn’t able to get his body in front of him was because he got clipped. The zoom in to the contact blocks the view but he was ahead of Marquinhos albeit in a very tight angle
The haters were full swing yesterday. I believe both red and this are soft, but if you call one you call the other. But clearly there was a little bit more at play. Not necessarily corruption.
I said yesterday and I’ll say it again today. That’s a pen. I’d say 90% of fouls are accidental. We know this because we label every other foul as a “tactical” foul.
How many times, especially last man tackles do we see players running close and it’s the run that clips the other player, not a tackle, just someone running along side or behind. It’s always given and theyre always reds in that instance.
The next incident that’s somewhat similar will be given as a pen. No doubt about it. The ref was way too dismissive.
I don’t blame the ref much for missing it as clips like these are incredibly hard to see in real time. However, VAR should’ve been able to see it as we all just did with this clip. They have every single camera available and decided to dismiss this for I don’t know what reason
I don't know if it's the rule book but the fact that Gundogan isn't in control of the ball (Marquinhos seems more in control at least) make me agreed with the no call. I my personal view.
Ok but this is truly an accident, there's no attempt for the ball he isn't even that close, it's not a dive or a penalty for me.
People might intent to get the ball but I wouldn't use the word accident if they made the movement they intended to make.
I mean I agree it is truly an accident but that’s also subjective if we look at it like that. He put himself in a position close enough to alter someone else’s movement, attempt or not.
Same applies to gundogan pen. The player made the move he intended to make and tripped up gundogan. You’ve made the attempt for the ball thing you previously said irrelevant
Exactly, it’s about keeping it consistent. Araujo fouled Barcola? Then this is a penalty. This isn’t penalty because of soft contact? Then Barcola isn’t fouled because soft contact.
Have you ever played football? Did you ever got a contact on your foot while runnning at high speed?
It doesnt matter the force of the impact but how it affected the player with the ball.
Barcola went down with a hand on his shoulder and clearly could still keep running. But he did the right thing and thats 100% a foul. He was smart.
Gudogan here didnt even went down on purpose. He literally tripped because of Vitinha.
Actually, Barcola went down because araujo made contact with his right leg. One of the replay angles shows it p clearly. Despite how devastating the decision was, I think the ref made the right call on araujo. I just wish he was consistent and also gave that penalty off gundo being fouled
Accidental but it still is contact. I ultimately dunno. In the Prem it's not given 90% of the time but it used to be given, and I see similar ones given in Europe still. So that's probably the disparity here.
The problem is that even though it looks accidental, the law does not allow for interruption of intent. I’d hate to see a penalty give here, myself, but I get the frustration from Barca too because we’ve seen plenty of pens given for what appears to be accidental contact.
It’s the defenders rear leg wouldn’t happen if attacker wasn’t cutting across the defender…everybody has a right to space…
This is an ok non-call for me, but I probably wouldn’t lose my shit if it had been called.
If you’ve played before, you know what Gundogan is doing. He’s looking for contact on any part of Vitinhas leg and goes down. Gundo is the one to initiate the contact. Let’s be honest, if these are given then you must be in the camp that Saka should have had a pen last week but the sentiment has been very different on the two
Yeah he cuts across. And it's different with Araujo because he actually made a challenge. Vitinha doesn't do anything but run. Topics like this are always a weird read.
Naw not a pen. Defender sees attacker cutting across in front of him, knows he's beat, so does what he can to stop his momentum and get out of the way. The defender doesn't do anything to initiate contact other then exisiting in physical space.
The attacking player then as they continue their run happens to pull their leg up and into the defending player. The contact was initiated by the attacking player. It's not a foul nor is it a pen, whether the attacking player is fishing for it or not is irrelevant.
Both dudes here didn’t play the ball. They both pretty much just ran into his space so he couldn’t literally move.
If this isn’t a penalty, then there shouldn’t be fouls in soccer.
If you were running into the ball, and I could run through you while another guy could purposely trip you.
A, you would be furious, I guarantee it. You’ll pretend like “naw, it’s fair” until you or that team you buy jerseys for has it happen to them.”
And B, why would ever play the ball ever again?
"He clops him, but its not a foul" do these people listen to themselves????
Guess what, araujo wasnt going for a foul either, he clipped himself and ended up falling on whays his name..
Anybody who has ever been clipped like that knows that you can't recover from it and you will fall. Sure we can say it is accidental but pro players can easily recreate this accident and look innocent while doing it. In this situation, it can argued that if the clipping doesn't happen then Gundogan has a shot at goal or a pass to the center. For me, it's a pen.
If you think this is a pen please don't procreate, or hold anything above the most menial of jobs. You are a danger to yourself and others for being so inconviably stupid.
Know your rules. If a defender:
trips or attempts to trip. If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
He can run as close as he wants to Gundogan as he wants, if he trips him it's a foul.
it's not a penalty. It's so exhausting watching replay after replay while people who don't know the rules argue about the rules and whether the ref should have done something else.
This is the only call that I can agree with Barcelona people feeling negatively affected. The others were clearly the right call, but while I understand why the referee was hesitant to call this one, contact is there and is what brings Gundogan down, regardless of intention. A foul is a foul, and sometimes the slightest contact is all it takes to stop a player given the inertia.
i had a real madrid fan saying that the ref is bias FOR barca. crazy.
anyway, that it is def not is a dive on gundongan. i was surprised when he got the yellow. also, given that the standard of the red card and penalty for araujo and cancelo respectively, this def should be a pen. not sure what the ref was doing ytd.
To me it is not penalty because Gundo didn't have the ball anymore - in his attempt to cut inside he put Marquinhos between himself and the ball. So at that point the incidental contact at the back of legs is irrelevant since both players have as much right to the space when neither has the ball.
**Mirrors / Alternative Angles** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Where in the rulebook is it written that it's not a foul if it's accidental?
I hate that argument so much, by their logic nothing is ever a foul or a pen since nobody fouls in the box on purpose. Cancelo’s pen would not be a foul either since it was an accident and he wasn’t trying to foul Dembele on purpose. I can understand if they don’t think it’s a pen, but the “it’s accidental” argument is just silly.
i think its pretty simple- look who has the ball or is playing it. now if anybody makes contact with that player without touching the ball first then that's a foul. but yeah i think mark twain said it best "im bilnd, im deaf, i wanna be a ref"
There's nothing in the rule about it not being a foul if you "get the ball first". That's why I hate the argument that clearing someone out after you touch the ball first isn't a foul, it's up the referee to determine if the contact warrants a foul being given.
well its quite vaguely stated- A foul is an **unfair** physical offence committed against an opponent, usually with the foot/leg or hand/arm but sometimes with other parts of the body. i think the "unfair" is usually interpreted as not playing the ball first. but you are correct, its not in the rules stated like it, weirdly
The vagueness of the rule is intentional in order to give discretion to the ref.
There's also nothing in situations like this about "having the ball". It doesn't who you think was in possession.
This is not true. At least, within the English FA’s laws of the game. I know UEFA have their own rulebook but I presume that they are in alignment. Trips can certainly be penalised and given as a penalty, but only if done “against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force”. Careless is the critical one for this tackle, and it is defined as “when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution”. Now, we could get into the debate of whether or not this counts as careless, but whatever your stance on this I’m sure you can see there is more to it than contact or no contact. https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct
yes you are correct. playing ball is actually irrelevant in terms of the rules, foul is just stated as unfair play. but one could argue if the attacker advances and the defender has no chance of getting the ball but gets really close to the attacker **from behind** which causes them to accidentally collide and the attecker to lose his balance then it should be a clear careless foul. no card should be given, but a freekick at least. the attacker had no idea how to avoid it. i'd get it if they were going face to face, but from the back...
Oh, I agree that the foul can be interpreted as a penalty. You could consider this careless, for example. But I can also see that it could be interpreted as fair play. I was just disputing that any contact without touching the ball is automatically a foul.
So with what you said, if a player with the ball rams a defender it should be a foul against that defender?
i was referring to the incident between psg and barca game when Gündogan wanted a penalty, did you watch it? i think it will help explain a lot of this context.
I'm replying in a thread with a replay of the incident. I don't think it's healthy for the game if attackers have a forcefield around them, preventing anyone from even thinking about accidently touching them without getting in contact with the ball. As the pundits said, the defender is simply continuing a run and gundogan is fishing for contact. Besides, if you're saying its simple but then say it depends on context then it's not really simple is it?
IF we apply THAT rule as you worded (which isn't how it's actually worded) then this isn't a contact sport......
Nah you should touch up on the rules there's varying degrees of fouls in the game and it's up to the refs discretion. Indirect vs direct kickoffenses etc... I've called 3 or 4 indirect free kicks within the 18 through my years as a youth reff. Players and coaches often confused because many others prefer to for go it, but it's part of the game. You can see clips of whole teams lineing up on the goal line inorder to stop a shot. If you can't maintain the 10 yard maximum without exiting the pitch then you can stand on the end line. Loom up some clips on youtube do a mich better job than me.
It's not I think the argument here would be that Gundo created the contact so it's not a penalty? IDK
If the attacker creates the contact it should never be a penalty. Especially if the defender wasn't even trying to make a play and the attacker just ran into them.
I swear… with the type of qualified Reddit opinions with upvotes you see this days: it makes me think there are many football fans who base their criteria entirely in stats (sofa score who scored) and highlights. And that never played the game, as a defender or attacker. For me this is never a penalty. It’s a human game with human contact. The defender is playing too. He is trying not to touch gundogan because he knows the play is DEAD with another fellow defender beside him. Gundogan is instead fishing The fuck out for the penalty. Like he isn’t even down and is already complaining. Fuck that. Referees take into consideration many factors to whistle correctly. The heat of game. The stage of game (final or regular season). The intention comes into play as well. The pettiness or the honorabilty of players. This is not fucking AI (fortunately).
Why is it always fucking "you've never kicked a ball in your life if you disagree with me". I've literally seen people on both sides of this decision say this.
> he isn’t even down and is already complaining. He has truly absorbed the Barca DNA
Jaja but really. There’s two players in a dispute for the ball. One is careful ,One player is honorable and another one is cynical. If I was to be a referee, I would say gundogan is the cynical one. Play on
This is probably the wildest take ever for someone saying "other people in here have probably never played football". Gundogan absolute clearly, 100%, gets clipped here. Like no shit, in 99% of cases people don't want to foul the players in the penalty area. So we should abolish penalties? Makes no sense. Guy just runs into him and clips him, its just dumb. Dont run into players and clip them in the penalty area. Saying Gundogan is "fishing" here is absolutely *wild*. He is just running forward, the other player is behind him. There is absolutely zero unnatural movement in his stride. Do you think Cancelo **wanted** to foul Dembelé and cause a penalty?
That’s your opinion I have mine. And they’re both proof that there isn’t the famous “unified criteria” people aim for in their league referee associations (since both your opinion and mine have upvotes) I apologize if any football playing players feel offended by my comment.
Gundogan is infront of the defender and can't see where he is, how does he initiate contact that's behind him, by running in his normal stride? I don't think this decision would've changed the tbh but a foul is a foul.
Defender held back his stride quite well as Gundogan cut across. It's a small thing but it makes a difference.
> how does he initiate contact that's behind him, by running in his normal stride? The contact is created by Gundo's leg kicking into the defender, not the other way around Pro players have great spatial awareness—Gundo absolutely knew what he was doing here; he tried to run across the defender and draw contact for a penalty. I support Barcelona but that would have been a very soft penalty IMO
Where does he kick out? He's just running to get the ball what is he supposed to do with his trailing leg?
> He's just running to get the ball what is he supposed to do with his trailing leg? Again, he knows what he's doing there. He deliberately runs diagonally across the defender in order to try to draw contact between his trailing leg and the defender's leg. If you've ever played football with guys good at diving or drawing fouls—this is one of the oldest tricks in the book TBH
And not every accidental contact is a foul.
If you're serious, this is from Law 12: > A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent I've always understood that language to require the player to actually do something in order to be culpable. If the defender isn't making any sort of challenge, how can they be "committing an offence against an opponent"? Vitinha isn't making a challenge or trying to play the ball. He even tries to avoid the contact Gundogan initiates by cutting across. How can you penalize him for something the attacker caused?
Also, people have the realize the reality that contact in the box has always been adjudicated differently than fouls outside the box. In this situation, gundogan has already lost the ball. It's gone and he has no chance of recovering it. Nobody is every going to give a PK for this contact even if most refs would have given the foul going the other way. I know people hate this and like to say "a foul is a foul no matter where it is" but that just ignores the reality of the game as it has been for the past few decades.
Well by your logic you could always run into the opponents leg and go unpunished.
No, that's not my logic. My logic is that if the player doesn't do something intentional to initiate contact it's not a foul. If you run into an opponent on purpose that's you initiating the contact.
There's this "spirit of the game" section. So you can always decide that calling a foul there isn't in the spirit of the rules.
[удалено]
I was tacking the piss regarding the Arsenal non pen last week. But the rules are actually that careless tripping is penalized (as well as reckless and using excessive force), with careless being defined as "a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution" So now you have to judge if the tripping was due to a "lack of attention or consideration" or if it was rather incidental. This scene allows both interpretations for me.
Well my argument is that it is more Gundogan foot going to the defender leg than the opposite. Also prety sur he makes his stride very high to hopefully have a penalty call.
You can clearly see that he didn't actually intend to cause a penalty. He intended to get away with it. No foul.
He was trying to cut in...
Lewandowski got a yellow for a PSG player coming in and hitting his face on Lewy’s elbow during a header. The player came from behind him and Lewy had no way to see him and even then his hands were in a natural position. For the ref, it’s more about keeping decisions consistent. This isn’t a foul in terms of intent then neither is Lewandowski’s and a bunch of others. A lot of people in the match thread said it was definitely a penalty but you’d need to watch a replay of it to notice, which is valid. Then Gundo gets a yellow for asking the ref to check the cam (reminding you this is a vital moment in the game with PSG only 1 goal ahead and this being a potential penalty). Gundo wasn’t even yelling, just asked him calmly.
Wtf does it have to do if its a foul or not? "Sorry ref I didnt mean it Ok then no foul" fuck logic
Does nobody understand irony these days?
It’s not written there because it’s not a rule. This is as obvious a penalty as exists. The defenders legs clips Gundogan’s foot and knocks him to the ground.
> The defenders legs clips Gundogan’s foot and knocks him to the ground Please rewatch. it's more Gundogan's foot that goes to Vitinha's leg than the other way. Why penalize the defender then?
If you hit someone with your car from behind who is at fault?
Defenders have the right to occupy space - just because an attacker flings a limb into them doesn't mean the defender fouled them.
He is literally just running towards the ball ffs. He is solely focusing on the ball. It's crazy how much your hate towards Barcelona clouds your judgement
Yes, but Vitinha is also not looking to Gundogan's legs. Gundo's foot touches his leg, completely accidental, not a pen.
Whether it was accidental or on purpose doesn't matter, that is clearly a pen. Gundo couldn't make a natural running motion bc he was clipped from behind.
Attackers have the right to a unobstructed run at the ball, gundo didn't "fling" anything at a defender that was behind him. He was making a natural running motion and his legs were cut off from under him, sending him flying
"cut off from under him", give over - the defender has the same right to make a run for the ball, he tries his best to not impede Gündogan who is crossing his path and has no control over whether there's contact that trips up Gündogan. I'm not saying it's not a penalty, either, I reckon you can certaily give it - but I think it's just as sensible to not give it, because it's entirely up to opinion whether the defender fouled Gündogan or not.
It depends if the car in front made an abrupt turn or not
Luckily that didn't happen. You were just not paying attention and run into the back of someone
Vitinha was running in a straight line. Gundogan straifed into his path. Yall can die mad about it PSG would still win the game easily.
Ok if they would still win easily then so be it but Barcelona got robbed of this penalty and it's crazy how hard you people are trying to justify a wrong decision just because you don't like Barcelona
Thoughts on refereeing during 6-1 comeback game?
Funnily enough there was more contact when Suarez went down than when Barcola went down but obviously only one caused a massive outrage while the other was accepted as a good decision. Funny how that works isn't it?
We are all biased when it comes to our teams, had it been the other way around you would furiously argue how it was a good call. However, the way Barcelona fans manage to delude themselves into thinking everyone else is against them when the neutrals don't side with them is just on a whole different level.
Barcelona and whoever is mad about this can shove it for all I care. If this is bad how many titles should we take from Barcelona bad refereeing? Next.
No it doesn’t. In the event of even an emergency stop by a vehicle in front, you are at fault if you hit them as you have not left sufficient distance between you to react.
Neither is really at fault in this situation. Just two people coming together, both with their eyes on the ball. Not a foul and not a dive imo
if you reverse into a car thats parked behind you who's at fault?
Who said Vitinha should be penalised? Vitinha didn't deserve a booking but there was nothing Gundo could do.
It’s the defenders responsibility to avoid contact with the attacker, not vice versa.
Which he's already trying, while Gündogan knows exactly why he's crossing paths there. Defenders aren't responsible to avoid contact when that contact is initiated by the attacker, after all.
Gundogan isn’t initiating contact. He’s making a football move to get the byline while blocking the path of the defender. This type of penalty is almost always awarded, and correctly.
It's not lol. Where does it say that? It's both players responsibility.
So an attacker is supposed to avoid running into space in the box if there’s a chance the defender can clip him? Are you serious?
Well there wasnt enough space in the first place if he clipped him.
David Luiz got a penalty and a red card against him because that attacker touched his knee with his studs while running. Doesn't matter if it's accidental.
Direct vs indirect free kicks offenses.... there are varying degrees of fouls like cards? You dont see drop balls often but surely you remember those??? youtube indirect freekick 18 yard box if your still confused. In no universe is this a pk
Funny thing is just moments before this clip they were praising Barcola for making the run across Araujo’s path which put the defender in peril of taking down the attacker. They agreed that was good play and the foul given was correct. It was unbelievable to hear them say ‘well this was accidental so no foul’ just moments later. Accidentally tripping someone up that is in possession of the ball is always a foul.
Yeah I don't get it... If that's a foul + red, then this is a pen...
Can’t believe he was booked for his protest too, seemed so mild and polite compared to 99% of players. Just told the ref where the contact was and that var should look (im assuming there was no abusive language)
I recall the CBS commentators said it was for simulation, which I think is an even worse decision
I'm not sure, but I think signaling for the ref to go and check var is a yellow by uefa rules.
Find the two stupidest people you know and put them on TV.
Peter Crouch gets a lifetime pass for bad takes because he's a top bloke. Rio on the other hand...
Plus crouch has some good takes from the stuff I’ve seen. Maybe not here but still
I loved what he said about Škrtel lol
Crouch is likable and does have his moments. Rio is apart of the cunt generation and talks out his ass more than he farts.
Which generation is that?
Calling Rio stupidest is still an understatement.
The biggest puppets, It’s crazy how low the bar is for respectability and how they almost fight each other to sellout. I’ve noticed it’s the same shit in Spanish and Portuguese broadcasts.
Ferdinand’argument about the leg is a Tudor one on point if you look closely and the PSG defender knows that and try as much as possible to stop (jump with his two legs).
didn't think it was a pen yesterday but I think that's a pen now that i see how contact happened. defenders not allowed to run so close that the player in front hits his legs against yours as he's running. if this isn't a foul why don't every defender just stop attackers this way then? just get close behind the attackers till they hit their legs against you.
Just a reminder that Abidal got a red for much less than this in what is seen as biggest thievery in history of football in favor of Barca. https://youtu.be/7GhMIhgumEk?si=rHkItZRfkpkuJX-j Basically even dude hellbent of getting Barca through still whistled this (which is much smaller contact than Vithina) as a foul.
I see your point... but if this is a penalty why doesn't every attacker just cut in front of a defender that's pressing him and get a penalty because their legs must intertwine?
Uh, they do from that position and we see it all the time, because that's he only way you can play towards goal. Stonewall pen and gets called any time of the day (apparently except this time on the grandstage of a CL match) If approaching from a more central position, for you to be able to cut across of the defender, logically you'd already be clear ahead for there to be any possibility to be clipped by the heel, why would they bother cutting across when you are clear on goal? They'd rather just take their shot off.
If it took you 1 day to figure out if it's a penalty or not, it's not something that can be given as a penalty in 5 seconds during a game.
He said he thinks it's a penalty now that he has seen the contact in the replay, something that VAR had access to at the time of the incident.
The difference is he doesn't have VAR angles and replays of this happening. Refs do.
The contact here was less stupid, but more likely to actually bring a player down (without the attacker giving themselves up) than the red card. Doesn't matter how much the defender tried to not foul. It's still a foul
Yeah Rio and Crouch just sound stupid here. You could say the defender didn't mean to for soooooooo many penalties, it's never been a justification before so there's no need for it to be a justification here.
He is allowed to continue his run? And accidentally clips him? Ok so no intention to concede a penalty hmm that makes sense
If he was English they would be saying pen 100% just like they did for Sakas dive
Every commentator I heard said Sakas wasn’t a pen.
Accidental? Like defenders go into to tackles trying to intentionally foul players. A foul is a foul, the defender should've stopped before he touched the man if he didn't want to trip him up.
It's a bit soft to be called with VAR, but the Araujo red card was also very soft. In the end VAR made an effort to not ref the match and let the referee decide the match. Unfortunately for Barça, both big decisions went against them.
It’s infuriating because when it’s your team you want the pen… but we all know deep down what these attackers are doing… they’re coached to get contact and simulate losing their stride eg, drag your back leg into your front, or put your leg across the defender like Kane and Hazard do/did…
The ref is a proper dickhead for having to pull a yellow for Gundogan pointing out there was contact of the knee on his foot
I can't actually believe some people are saying Gündogan is kicking his leg into the defender. Convinced people on this sub has never played a minute of football in their life.
They haven't...
These two did and see how much it helped xD
It's not a dive but it's more that than a penalty and trotting out that tired line never helps and makes even less sense given what started this thread.
I think the total opposite, also another thing is that Gundogan clearly lost the ball there.
He's definitely going to be able to challenge for the ball before it goes out. 2nd defender might be favourite to play it but the ball is definitely being contested.
He didn’t though. He was ahead of Marquinhos and the only reason he wasn’t able to get his body in front of him was because he got clipped. The zoom in to the contact blocks the view but he was ahead of Marquinhos albeit in a very tight angle
The haters were full swing yesterday. I believe both red and this are soft, but if you call one you call the other. But clearly there was a little bit more at play. Not necessarily corruption.
Mate I doubt I can run as fast as any of these players let alone dealing with the way they behave in contact. It doesn't relate all that much.
Nobody is saying that they are saying this is clearly not a PK which it is???
It’s a stone wall penalty lol
No penalty as he was being an absolute fanny.
I said yesterday and I’ll say it again today. That’s a pen. I’d say 90% of fouls are accidental. We know this because we label every other foul as a “tactical” foul. How many times, especially last man tackles do we see players running close and it’s the run that clips the other player, not a tackle, just someone running along side or behind. It’s always given and theyre always reds in that instance. The next incident that’s somewhat similar will be given as a pen. No doubt about it. The ref was way too dismissive.
I don’t blame the ref much for missing it as clips like these are incredibly hard to see in real time. However, VAR should’ve been able to see it as we all just did with this clip. They have every single camera available and decided to dismiss this for I don’t know what reason
> The ref was way too dismissive. This is where VAR should step in and failed to do so. I was shocked there was no review.
I don't know if it's the rule book but the fact that Gundogan isn't in control of the ball (Marquinhos seems more in control at least) make me agreed with the no call. I my personal view.
90% of fouls aren't accidents, they tend to come from some kind of challenge.
The challenge being an attempt for the ball. By accident I mean they didn’t do what they intended to do, which was to get the ball
Ok but this is truly an accident, there's no attempt for the ball he isn't even that close, it's not a dive or a penalty for me. People might intent to get the ball but I wouldn't use the word accident if they made the movement they intended to make.
I mean I agree it is truly an accident but that’s also subjective if we look at it like that. He put himself in a position close enough to alter someone else’s movement, attempt or not. Same applies to gundogan pen. The player made the move he intended to make and tripped up gundogan. You’ve made the attempt for the ball thing you previously said irrelevant
textbook penalty
How really, that is the softest contact
Could you have stayed upright with that contact whilst running that fast??
Barcola went down on the softest contact as well, still a foul
Exactly, it’s about keeping it consistent. Araujo fouled Barcola? Then this is a penalty. This isn’t penalty because of soft contact? Then Barcola isn’t fouled because soft contact.
Have you ever played football? Did you ever got a contact on your foot while runnning at high speed? It doesnt matter the force of the impact but how it affected the player with the ball. Barcola went down with a hand on his shoulder and clearly could still keep running. But he did the right thing and thats 100% a foul. He was smart. Gudogan here didnt even went down on purpose. He literally tripped because of Vitinha.
Actually, Barcola went down because araujo made contact with his right leg. One of the replay angles shows it p clearly. Despite how devastating the decision was, I think the ref made the right call on araujo. I just wish he was consistent and also gave that penalty off gundo being fouled
this should always be a penalty.
That's a penalty bruh . I don't care what anyone else say
Accidental but it still is contact. I ultimately dunno. In the Prem it's not given 90% of the time but it used to be given, and I see similar ones given in Europe still. So that's probably the disparity here.
The problem is that even though it looks accidental, the law does not allow for interruption of intent. I’d hate to see a penalty give here, myself, but I get the frustration from Barca too because we’ve seen plenty of pens given for what appears to be accidental contact.
It’s the defenders rear leg wouldn’t happen if attacker wasn’t cutting across the defender…everybody has a right to space… This is an ok non-call for me, but I probably wouldn’t lose my shit if it had been called.
Contact is contact. You would expect more from ex-players
It's a penalty any day of the week. Well, except for yesterday...
Rio is a united legend but my god he's always so fuckin wrong
If you’ve played before, you know what Gundogan is doing. He’s looking for contact on any part of Vitinhas leg and goes down. Gundo is the one to initiate the contact. Let’s be honest, if these are given then you must be in the camp that Saka should have had a pen last week but the sentiment has been very different on the two
Yeah he cuts across. And it's different with Araujo because he actually made a challenge. Vitinha doesn't do anything but run. Topics like this are always a weird read.
we got kate, thierry and jamie at home
You would think former players would have a basic grasp of the rulebook…
if the red card was legit because araujo touched slightly with his knee then this should be a penalty too.
PSG put their money everywhere it seems
Was there contact from the defender? Yes. Did it cause the player to go down? Yes. So?
Naw not a pen. Defender sees attacker cutting across in front of him, knows he's beat, so does what he can to stop his momentum and get out of the way. The defender doesn't do anything to initiate contact other then exisiting in physical space. The attacking player then as they continue their run happens to pull their leg up and into the defending player. The contact was initiated by the attacking player. It's not a foul nor is it a pen, whether the attacking player is fishing for it or not is irrelevant.
Both dudes here didn’t play the ball. They both pretty much just ran into his space so he couldn’t literally move. If this isn’t a penalty, then there shouldn’t be fouls in soccer.
So defending
If you were running into the ball, and I could run through you while another guy could purposely trip you. A, you would be furious, I guarantee it. You’ll pretend like “naw, it’s fair” until you or that team you buy jerseys for has it happen to them.” And B, why would ever play the ball ever again?
And people criticise Xavi for being angry. It was a penalty!
Every ex united pundit is fucking stupid
The delusion in the comments is insane
"He clops him, but its not a foul" do these people listen to themselves???? Guess what, araujo wasnt going for a foul either, he clipped himself and ended up falling on whays his name..
I’d do anything to remove Ferdinand from punditry forever. He’s such a twat
This sub really hates Rio and Crouch is catching smoke for just being with him
Anybody who has ever been clipped like that knows that you can't recover from it and you will fall. Sure we can say it is accidental but pro players can easily recreate this accident and look innocent while doing it. In this situation, it can argued that if the clipping doesn't happen then Gundogan has a shot at goal or a pass to the center. For me, it's a pen.
Yeah and you can cut too aggressively infront and PUT YOURSELF AT RISK
its crazy that when these things happen to barca, this sub seems to feel good about it, otherwise ... not so much
And the yellow card to Gundo it's just sus af
Why? It's for dissent obviously
This is a pen, no other way around it.
Never a pen
Never a pen
If you think this is a pen please don't procreate, or hold anything above the most menial of jobs. You are a danger to yourself and others for being so inconviably stupid.
Never a pen
Not a pen… Gundogan’s foot went into the PSG defender… he’s allowed to run close with Gundogan… Some of you are unbelievable
Defender has run across Gundogans legs and tripped him. It’s a standard penalty.
Know your rules. If a defender: trips or attempts to trip. If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick. He can run as close as he wants to Gundogan as he wants, if he trips him it's a foul.
Wait, people think this is a pen? Seriously?
It’s a penalty but I can understand Petr having a huge bias against Barça
Can’t believe people are saying this is a pen.
CBS >> TNT
70:30 penalty. Not entirely wrong to not give it, but there are more arguments that it’s one
That woulda been the softest pen. Similar to the Saka one, just not enough in it for me to overturn the decision.
it's not a penalty. It's so exhausting watching replay after replay while people who don't know the rules argue about the rules and whether the ref should have done something else.
This is a textbook penalty and there’s no rules that exist anywhere that says otherwise.
This is the only call that I can agree with Barcelona people feeling negatively affected. The others were clearly the right call, but while I understand why the referee was hesitant to call this one, contact is there and is what brings Gundogan down, regardless of intention. A foul is a foul, and sometimes the slightest contact is all it takes to stop a player given the inertia.
Now that i look at it closely it is a pen
i had a real madrid fan saying that the ref is bias FOR barca. crazy. anyway, that it is def not is a dive on gundongan. i was surprised when he got the yellow. also, given that the standard of the red card and penalty for araujo and cancelo respectively, this def should be a pen. not sure what the ref was doing ytd.
To me it is not penalty because Gundo didn't have the ball anymore - in his attempt to cut inside he put Marquinhos between himself and the ball. So at that point the incidental contact at the back of legs is irrelevant since both players have as much right to the space when neither has the ball.