"There was contact!"

Kirby · 06-02-2012 12:27PM

Lads I asked you to leave the tribalism out of it. Discuss the issue. Lets not turn this into United vs Liverpool please.

jonnyfingers · 06-02-2012 12:35PM

Kirby wrote: »

Lads I asked you to leave the tribalism out of it. Discuss the issue. Lets not turn this into United vs Liverpool please.

Well to discuss the issue. Is Ivanovic entitled to make a slide tackle, miss it, and then because he's in the way make Welbeck avoid contact with his legs completely to get the ball?

I would say something if Ivanovic did not go to ground, or stick a leg out and Welbeck went down. But he did attempt, and miss, a tackle.

The onus has to be on the defender. A tackle in the box is risky. You have to get it 100% right. If you don't and an attacker goes down you lose all right to appeal in my opinion. If they know that contact is going to risk a penalty been given, why not decide not to make the tackle and instead try to block a shot or shepherd the attacker away from goal?

_blank_ · 06-02-2012 12:38PM

Football 365 mailbox

Hmmmm

Will I Amnt · 06-02-2012 12:39PM

If there is contact and a player goes down,a foul should only be called if the contact made the player go down not simply because there was contact when he went down.

Did Ivanovich cause Welbeck to go down??
I don't think it's clear cut.Welbeck doesn't seem to move his leg towards Ivanovich like Johnson did but Ivanovich does his best to pull out of the tackle and the contact is minimal.

Personally I wouldn't have given it after seeing the replays.

Kirby · 06-02-2012 12:41PM

jonnyfingers wrote: »

Well to discuss the issue. Is Ivanovic entitled to make a slide tackle, miss it, and then because he's in the way make Welbeck avoid contact with his legs completely to get the ball?

He isn't in the way. The ball, and Welbeck is past Ivanovic. Welbeck decides to stop and drag his own leg and kick Ivanovic. We see it all the time.

Kirby · 06-02-2012 12:42PM

Des wrote: »

Football 365 mailbox

Hmmmm

Thats me. Mentioned it on page 2.

jonnyfingers · 06-02-2012 12:52PM

Kirby wrote: »

He isn't in the way. The ball, and Welbeck is past Ivanovic. Welbeck decides to stop and drag his own leg and kick Ivanovic. We see it all the time.

First of all Welbeck was not past Ivanovic. I know we wont agree but I've looked at the replay numberous times. Welbeck does not drag his leg. He tries to control the ball with his right foot but misses. This is what causes him to momentarily stop. He then tries to run on with his left leg which is when he's tripped.

Second, even if Wellbeck did delay his run until Ivanovic's leg was in his way is he not entitled to stop running for a second if he wants too? He has done nothing wrong. My point is that Ivanovic should not have been there, at all. He made a poor tackle and got caught out.

If the same things happens against United in the next game I'll completely stick to this rationale.

Guy:Incognito · 06-02-2012 01:11PM

darokane wrote: »

Really, Ivanovic is impeding Welbeck clearly in that photo, he has purposely put his 2 feet in the way of Welbeck going forward
It's a penalty.

Ivanovic stopped well outside the path of Wellbecks legs. Wellbeck moved his left leg sideways in to Ivanovic.

jonnyfingers wrote: »

I
I just went back and watched the Welbeck penalty again. It really was a penalty.

Video here for anyone who wants it.

http://videa.hu/videok/sport/g3-2comatchhighlight.com-http-www.matchhighlight.com-lif79q3FsKbEyzUC
.

You have to be joking? Even the most biased fan cant say that wasnt a dive. Watch the 2nd angle from the goal side. Ivanovic stops his legs before they get to Wellbeck and Wellbeck throws his leg over in to Ivanovic.

Your own link proves it.

Jayob10 · 06-02-2012 01:30PM

Thought Sky and BBC were both pretty disgraceful in their analysis of the incidents involving Johnson and Wellbeck.

There seemed to be an attitude of tapping them on the back in congratulations for earning their side a penalty, from Neville (who is usually excellent) and Alan Shearer (granted he is usually crap).

Now granted, Shearer can't afford to use double standards as he probably tried the same thing many times as a player but the point is that these TV companies and ex pros condoning this play acting is doing more damage.

To be all high and mighty about you could even say kids are watching players be rewarded for this play acting and will go out and try it themselves.

Shearer said on MOTD that "Johnson was entitled to go down in that instance". Absolutely baffling. I mean he either was taken off his feet or he wasn't. If he leaves his foot in then thats his decision to go down, but don't congratulate him for it.

Will I Amnt · 06-02-2012 01:30PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Ivanovic stopped well outside the path of Wellbecks legs. Wellbeck moved his left leg sideways in to Ivanovic.

Can't really say that for sure,it looked a fairly natural movement for him chasing after the ball.
It was just a bit of a coming together that could have went either way.

Guy:Incognito · 06-02-2012 01:32PM

cambo2008 wrote: »

Can't really say that for sure,it looked a fairly natural movement for him chasing after the ball.
It was just a bit of a coming together that could have went either way.

How come it didnt happen defore he got to Ivanovic?

Its very fortunate for all these attackers that this natural sideways movement of their legs happen just as a defender arrives all the time.

If Wellbeck had kept running the line he was running he wouldnt have made contact with Ivanovic at all.

Will I Amnt · 06-02-2012 01:38PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

cambo2008 wrote: »

Can't really say that for sure,it looked a fairly natural movement for him chasing after the ball.
It was just a bit of a coming together that could have went either way.

How come it didnt happen defore he got to Ivanovic?

Its very fortunate for all these attackers that this natural sideways movement of their legs happen just as a defender arrives all the time.

If Wellbeck had kept running the line he was running he wouldnt have made contact with Ivanovic at all.

Actually scrap that last comment I've just watched a replay from an angle I didn't see before and he definitely does stick his leg out.
I had already said I wouldn't have given it myself but after seeing that I don't see how anyone could stand by that decision.

Edit it's around the 00:35 mark in this

kippy · 06-02-2012 01:44PM

This kinda stuff has been going on for years.
Diving, "simulation" and basic cheating are all part of the game and players of all teams will do it from time to time although some are worse than others. I am sure most coaches actively encourage it, especially in the box.
It is a results game after all.It's no confined to the "foreigners" either as we all know.
What has happened as someone has rightly pointed out, is that now we have almost 24 hour media coverage of top level soccer. 17 cameras at a match and many many replays and hours of TV to fill. Refs have a tough job to keep on top of it.

The only way to cut this kind of thing out without effecting the flow of the game is retrospective punishments (although these may not alter the outcome of the match, and may not go far enough)
A manager could be allowed to report two "incidents" for review after a match. A panel reviews the evidence and if simulation is found a large cash/match fine to player and club. Repeated acts, bigger punishments.

It's also about time the refs starting giving penos for blatent "holding on" , "climbing" and acting the fool in the box.

However, I don't think there is enough appetite for any changes to take place on either these fronts as the drame/publicity they create only helps to ensure the premierleague remains a talking point long after the match is over.

Morzadec · 06-02-2012 01:46PM

Liverpool fan, imo it's a penalty (the Welbeck incident). Ivanovic trips him, gets nothing on the ball and something on Welbeck; I think it's hard to argue that it's not a penalty.

The fact is there wouldn't be the debate if defenders made clean challenges. Defenders need to be careful in the box, because debating exactly how much contact warrants a penalty is really difficult and you need to make the rules as clear cut as possible. Trip inside the box = penalty.

Out of interest Kirby and others: If a player is tripped, can stay on his feet but by doing so will be in a worse position before he was tripped as he is off balance and knocked slightly off stride, do you not think he should go down? The ref will certainly not give the penalty if he doesn't go down (not wanting to make a ballsy call to give a penalty for someone who doesn't fall, or perhaps just playing advantage), and the player will probably go on to miss when before he was in a goalscoring position and is probably deserving of a penalty.

An example of this was Suarez earlier this year. I can't remember the exact match (maybe a pool fan can refresh my memory, think it was against Stoke), but he could have easily gone down under a challenge but continued playing on clearly in a worse position than the opportunity a penalty would have afforded. The defender had missed the ball and made contact with Suarez and I remember thinking it would have been a stonewall peno if he had gone.

Anyway Suarez missed the chance and a penalty would have likely been scored. So it's hard to say that you wouldn't want your player to take advantage of fouls in the box by drawing the refs attention to it and going down

EDIT: Watching the Wellbeck penalty a few more times, I'm not so sure...It's a tough one and it looks like Welbeck might have intentionally stuck his leg out looking to get tripped. Either way Ivanovic is unlucky as he's made no movement towards the ball, but he has arguably impeded Wellbeck. Really tough one

SlickRic · 06-02-2012 01:48PM

those defending the Welbeck penalty so vociferously are as bad as those who thought Webb was biased yesterday tbh.

anyway, i detest the "there was contact" line.

infuriating.

players will always look for it, but we really are in a time where it seems a player only has to be touched, or they even touch the defender, and he has the right to go down. it's complete bollocks.

and you know what else? referees are failing to book people for it.

a while after Johnson's at the weekend too, he tried it again, and the referee simply waved play on. that players should've been booked on the spot. the reason it's getting so frequent is that when it doesn't work, there's no punishment, so why wouldn't a player keep trying it? there's no booking, no retrospective action, nothing.

Guy:Incognito · 06-02-2012 01:53PM

Morzadec wrote: »

The fact is there wouldn't be the debate if defenders made clean challenges. Defenders need to be careful in the box, because debating exactly how much contact warrants a penalty is really difficult and you need to make the rules as clear cut as possible. Trip inside the box = penalty.

Ivanovic didnt tackle him though, he slid in near him and stopped before he got to him.It would be the same if he had run beside him without touching him.

Morzadec · 06-02-2012 01:59PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Ivanovic didnt tackle him though, he slid in near him and stopped before he got to him.It would be the same if he had run beside him without touching him.

Yeah watching it carefully I take back what I said.

I still think it's really hard to prove Welbeck intentionally put his leg out. And the fact is that Ivanovic's leg (which I know was not looking to nick the ball and was stationary) made contact with Welbeck's trailing leg.

I don't see how there's anyway this can retrospectively be looked at in terms of Welbeck cheating the ref. And if that's the case it's hard to argue against the penalty being given.

Whether Welbeck has cheated or not, it's a bit unlucky on Ivanovic alright

Kirby · 06-02-2012 02:08PM

I used Johnson and Welbeck as examples because it is fresh in peoples minds because it happened this weekend. I'd rather not delve into a tit for tat on whether they meant to dive or not as it's fairly clear cut at this point when you watch the videos.

The issue is not these two players but how the media just glossed over it, no manager or player spoke out against it and it happens every weekend. This is not good. FIFA need to actually do some good for the game for once. Uefa too. All official teams at this summers tourney should lay down a marker.

theteal · 06-02-2012 02:18PM

i don't think the welbeck case is a good example for this discussion as i don't think he intentionally dived. somebody had the best account for it in the match thread yesterday saying, it wasn't a dive but it wasn't a penalty either.

ivanovic was trying so hard not to make contact that he even pulls his leg further away when he felt welbeck's contact on him. in saying that, i don't think welbeck made intentional contact, he looks off balance as soon as he went to step off to the side and it was more clumsy than anything that he hit ivanovic. sure even the way he falls, he's still going after the ball - not exactly what you'd expect from a lad trying to fabricate a penalty decision.

either way, the ref had to make a decision after seeing it once in real-time. he wasn't at the best angle and saw contact. i can easily see why it was given.

i've not had a chance to look at the replays of the johnston incident so i can't comment there.

i think retrospective bans should be in place for blatant examples. did pires not get in a bit of trouble for that shocking example a few years ago?

Big Knox · 06-02-2012 02:39PM

Mr Alan wrote: »

What struck me as interesting yesterday was the difference in attitude that Sky & ESPN have towards the offence (or their pundits have anyway).

Johnson was slated on ESPN for cheating to win the peno. Wellbeck on Sky? Not in the slightest.

Sky always seem at pains to avoid pointing out diving when done by any English players (Gerrard, Rooney, Young), instead choosing to occassionally pick on a foreigner (Ngog or Eduardo for example) as stains against their "product" and the bastion of good sportsmanship that is PL football in England.

It's incredibly infuriating tbh.

Homerjay, that Young shirt grabbing would have been an incredibly soft peno & if you say Chelsea "got away with it" then there's no doubt Utd also did at every set piece as holding jerseys like that is very common. Young threw himself in the ground cause someone held his shirt - it was a dive imo.

Skys bias towards English players is embarrassing at this stage. It's so blatant and they don't try and hide it one bit. Rooney bar scoring the penalties was very poor yesterday, he was well off the pace and was constantly giving the ball away yet Sky decided he was MOTM and he was labelled "Magnificient today". It's a joke to be honest.

pickarooney · 06-02-2012 03:50PM

Why does everything have to be classed as a dive or a foul? In a huge number of cases the attacking player simply loses balance as seems to be the case in the Wellbeck video.

Guy:Incognito · 06-02-2012 04:01PM

pickarooney wrote: »

Why does everything have to be classed as a dive or a foul? In a huge number of cases the attacking player simply loses balance as seems to be the case in the Wellbeck video.

Why does he look towards the ref straight away and stick his hand up then? Why did he flick his leg in to Ivanovic?

06-02-2012 04:15PM

The worst dive in the United Chelsea game was David Luiz which was extremely blatant and there was no contact yet Chelsea got a free near the end in a dangerous area, thought I'd say it as it has been swept under the carpet a bit...

eagle eye · 06-02-2012 04:34PM

I didn't watch the game yesterday but from looking at those videos I don't think either player was at fault for what happened there in the Wellback/Ivanovic thing. It looks to me like totally incidental contact and its play on in my book. Referee got it wrong.

Jesus Shaves · 06-02-2012 05:19PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Why does he look towards the ref straight away and stick his hand up then?

Because he was fouled!

Guy:Incognito · 06-02-2012 05:23PM

darokane wrote: »

Because he was fouled!

Bit of context maybe? This is what I was replying to.

pickarooney wrote: »

In a huge number of cases the attacking player simply loses balance as seems to be the case in the Wellbeck video.

Dimithy · 06-02-2012 08:30PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Bit of context maybe? This is what I was replying to.

Because he thinks he was fouled?

willmunny1990 · 06-02-2012 08:45PM

Mr Alan wrote: »

What struck me as interesting yesterday was the difference in attitude that Sky & ESPN have towards the offence (or their pundits have anyway).

Johnson was slated on ESPN for cheating to win the peno. Wellbeck on Sky? Not in the slightest.

Sky always seem at pains to avoid pointing out diving when done by any English players (Gerrard, Rooney, Young), instead choosing to occassionally pick on a foreigner (Ngog or Eduardo for example) as stains against their "product" and the bastion of good sportsmanship that is PL football in England.

It's incredibly infuriating tbh.

Homerjay, that Young shirt grabbing would have been an incredibly soft peno & if you say Chelsea "got away with it" then there's no doubt Utd also did at every set piece as holding jerseys like that is very common. Young threw himself in the ground cause someone held his shirt - it was a dive imo.

Says the fella who said in a match thread a while ago that Suarez doesn't dive because he just exaggerates contact.

But I suppose that's a alright because he plays for Liverpool:rolleyes:

losthorizon · 06-02-2012 10:21PM

Just clone Collina - that would solve everything.

dfx- · 06-02-2012 11:12PM

losthorizon wrote: »

Just clone Collina - that would solve everything.

He was able to miss decisive fouls in big games as well...Chelsea v Barcelona quarterfinal 04

"There was contact!" is very similar to "he touched the ball" in my opinion.

"There was contact!"

Comments