Tonight's Football

[Prufrock]

I actually thought the game was two teams who are both struggling to find form of late and City won purely due to their higher individual quality and Arsenals mistakes.

I’d not say it was a good example of top top teams going at each other though was an absorbing watch in its own way.

I also think once again, if you are giving that penalty after VAR then there are going to need to be a LOT more penalties given for consistency sake. If a keeper comes fails to make contact with the ball and does with the man then it’s a penalty. In that case if you miss the ball and punch the man it’s a penalty. Every time. But I’m betting once again those decisions won’t be given on a consistent basis either way,

They're weird ones. It should be a penalty, but as you say they just don't get given. And all the pundits saying oh yes a penalty will watch the next 9 that don't get given whizz by without saying anything.

[BWFC_Insane]

I actually thought the game was two teams who are both struggling to find form of late and City won purely due to their higher individual quality and Arsenals mistakes.

I’d not say it was a good example of top top teams going at each other though was an absorbing watch in its own way.

I also think once again, if you are giving that penalty after VAR then there are going to need to be a LOT more penalties given for consistency sake. If a keeper comes fails to make contact with the ball and does with the man then it’s a penalty. In that case if you miss the ball and punch the man it’s a penalty. Every time. But I’m betting once again those decisions won’t be given on a consistent basis either way,

They're weird ones. It should be a penalty, but as you say they just don't get given. And all the pundits saying oh yes a penalty will watch the next 9 that don't get given whizz by without saying anything.

Well quite, I found it odd the pundits jumping to say ‘yep it’s a penalty’ completely ignored Akes shirt being blatantly pulled in the box a few minutes later. As did the ref and VAR. And you start to think if there is no consistency in refereeing when there is a video system and team reviewing everything, what is the point?

[GhostoftheBok]

They're weird ones. It should be a penalty, but as you say they just don't get given. And all the pundits saying oh yes a penalty will watch the next 9 that don't get given whizz by without saying anything.

It's a case that it's technically a foul, but that a keeper throwing themselves at a save is almost always seen as a coming together.

In that case I don't think Ederson could be said to be attempting a save. He was trying to clear the ball and when he was beaten to it he made no effort to redirect and avoid contact.

I think we'll see a few where people will shout "It was given against City", but it'll be a saving action and treated differently by refs.

The ones where it's "take the man even if you can't get the ball" will have to start being given after something this high profile, but then it's the PGMOL. Who knows what bollocks they will decide behind closed doors and not tell anyone about.

[Prufrock]

They're weird ones. It should be a penalty, but as you say they just don't get given. And all the pundits saying oh yes a penalty will watch the next 9 that don't get given whizz by without saying anything.

It's a case that it's technically a foul, but that a keeper throwing themselves at a save is almost always seen as a coming together.

In that case I don't think Ederson could be said to be attempting a save. He was trying to clear the ball and when he was beaten to it he made no effort to redirect and avoid contact.

I think we'll see a few where people will shout "It was given against City", but it'll be a saving action and treated differently by refs.

The ones where it's "take the man even if you can't get the ball" will have to start being given after something this high profile, but then it's the PGMOL. Who knows what bollocks they will decide behind closed doors and not tell anyone about.

I'm not sure about that. Not how it looks to me, he doesn't swing a leg at it, he's trying to get out and block the shot at point blank (like lots of the "save" ones are. It's a weird little star jump (because he's at a tight angle) so he's just trying to block it, but the ball beats him and he takes the man. Much more more of an attempted "save" than say if he'd tried to clear it.

But yeah, far from convinced we'll see a consistent clear approach across the board!

[boltonboris]

You see it every match - Ball falls to a striker, he gets his shot away but snatches at it because a defender has flown in with a last ditch challenge and taken him out. You NEVER get a penalty, because the general consensus is that it didn't actually impede you, because you got your shot away. Same last night. NKetia got his shot away, but as they collided, he also won the penalty

There needs to be consistency with it. Are they all fouls under the same circumstances? If they are, why do you generally not get them.

[GhostoftheBok]

I'm not sure about that. Not how it looks to me, he doesn't swing a leg at it, he's trying to get out and block the shot at point blank (like lots of the "save" ones are. It's a weird little star jump (because he's at a tight angle) so he's just trying to block it, but the ball beats him and he takes the man. Much more more of an attempted "save" than say if he'd tried to clear it.

But yeah, far from convinced we'll see a consistent clear approach across the board!

No, he's expecting Walker to get his body in there and he's already coming out when he realises the striker is in.

If you watch Ederson come out he is positioning to go low and collect/sweep, but as Nketiah steps across Walker he has to adjust. He's not trying to react to the shot, he's expecting to make a play for the ball and then he wants to use his body to put Nketiah off. It's not a "saving action" in any real sense, because he's not moving to block a shot, it's just a foul. His focus is initially intercepting the ball and then it's putting off the man.

It's that goalkeeper thing of "Okay, you'll get to the ball but you're going to take a whack. How's your bottle?" whilst still trying to look like they're making themselves small to avoid contact. Like a striker holding the back of his head as he backs in to try and look like he's worried for his safety rather than trying to do the other guy.

How reasonable it is to expect refs to consistently get those distinctions right I don't know. Also how easy it is for VAR is an interesting one.

In fairness to Nketiah, he deserves credit for that bit of movement across Walker that caused all that. He'd not have used his body like that 12 months ago.

[GhostoftheBok]

Incredible social media bots campaign to try and make the Qatari takeover bids look like "the will of the people" in both Manchester and Liverpool.

Loads of foreign fans have bought in as though it's real, because their only contact with English football is on social media. A lot of talk of "selfish locals" holding back "our club" from some kind of destiny, at the same time that they're claiming it's popular with locals. A bit muddled, but there you go.

Must have cost the Qataris a fortune, but it appears to be working for them.

[BWFC_Insane]

I'm not sure about that. Not how it looks to me, he doesn't swing a leg at it, he's trying to get out and block the shot at point blank (like lots of the "save" ones are. It's a weird little star jump (because he's at a tight angle) so he's just trying to block it, but the ball beats him and he takes the man. Much more more of an attempted "save" than say if he'd tried to clear it.

But yeah, far from convinced we'll see a consistent clear approach across the board!

No, he's expecting Walker to get his body in there and he's already coming out when he realises the striker is in.

If you watch Ederson come out he is positioning to go low and collect/sweep, but as Nketiah steps across Walker he has to adjust. He's not trying to react to the shot, he's expecting to make a play for the ball and then he wants to use his body to put Nketiah off. It's not a "saving action" in any real sense, because he's not moving to block a shot, it's just a foul. His focus is initially intercepting the ball and then it's putting off the man.

It's that goalkeeper thing of "Okay, you'll get to the ball but you're going to take a whack. How's your bottle?" whilst still trying to look like they're making themselves small to avoid contact. Like a striker holding the back of his head as he backs in to try and look like he's worried for his safety rather than trying to do the other guy.

How reasonable it is to expect refs to consistently get those distinctions right I don't know. Also how easy it is for VAR is an interesting one.

In fairness to Nketiah, he deserves credit for that bit of movement across Walker that caused all that. He'd not have used his body like that 12 months ago.

You seem to be inventing rules of the game here. If you are making a genuine attempt for the ball but are late and make contact with the opponent sufficient to impede their run its a foul. Its careless play.

There is no rule that says a keeper can miss the ball, make contact with the forward to bring them down - so long as they are making a 'saving action'. Whatever Ederson is doing - by the laws of the game - that is a foul. The problem is - its a foul if the keeper misses the ball and makes contact but is rarely given - you see a LOT of those sorts of coming togethers but rarely are they given. By the rules of the game though they are all fouls.

So its the consistency that matters. Either apply the rules or don't. But lets not start making stuff up that doesn't exist.

[boltonboris]

Did it impede him, seeing as he squeezed the ball under him and almost scored?

[BWFC_Insane]

Did it impede him, seeing as he squeezed the ball under him and almost scored?

I don't think you need to be in control of the ball. For example if someone is pulled down in the box even if the ball is not near them so long as the ball is in play its a penalty.

As per rules of the game.

Again - the issue is how those rules are consistently (or not) applied.

[Prufrock]

I'm not sure about that. Not how it looks to me, he doesn't swing a leg at it, he's trying to get out and block the shot at point blank (like lots of the "save" ones are. It's a weird little star jump (because he's at a tight angle) so he's just trying to block it, but the ball beats him and he takes the man. Much more more of an attempted "save" than say if he'd tried to clear it.

But yeah, far from convinced we'll see a consistent clear approach across the board!

No, he's expecting Walker to get his body in there and he's already coming out when he realises the striker is in.

If you watch Ederson come out he is positioning to go low and collect/sweep, but as Nketiah steps across Walker he has to adjust. He's not trying to react to the shot, he's expecting to make a play for the ball and then he wants to use his body to put Nketiah off. It's not a "saving action" in any real sense, because he's not moving to block a shot, it's just a foul. His focus is initially intercepting the ball and then it's putting off the man.

It's that goalkeeper thing of "Okay, you'll get to the ball but you're going to take a whack. How's your bottle?" whilst still trying to look like they're making themselves small to avoid contact. Like a striker holding the back of his head as he backs in to try and look like he's worried for his safety rather than trying to do the other guy.

How reasonable it is to expect refs to consistently get those distinctions right I don't know. Also how easy it is for VAR is an interesting one.

In fairness to Nketiah, he deserves credit for that bit of movement across Walker that caused all that. He'd not have used his body like that 12 months ago.

Nah not at all for me, Jeff. By the time the ball bounces Nketiah is almost alongside it but then has to wait for sit down, but he's at the ball for a long time. There's so much time when it's obvious to Ederson he isn't getting there first. So he's coming slowly at first in case Nketiah hooks it was it bounces up, and then once he has to wait for it to sit down he stands up jumps legs weirdly together and arms by his side to try to block the goal.

His whole game is about getting out to the striker early. He smothers things more often than he diving saves them. He's clearly trying to block the shot there IMO.

[Worthy4England]

There is no rule that says a keeper can miss the ball, make contact with the forward to bring them down - so long as they are making a 'saving action'. Whatever Ederson is doing - by the laws of the game - that is a foul. The problem is - its a foul if the keeper misses the ball and makes contact but is rarely given - you see a LOT of those sorts of coming togethers but rarely are they given. By the rules of the game though they are all fouls.

So its the consistency that matters. Either apply the rules or don't. But lets not start making stuff up that doesn't exist.

I'm fairly sure you argued the direct opposite of this, when I said it was correct to award a penalty to Argentina in the WC Semi, when Lloris tried to punch the ball, got nowhere near it and then clattered into Messi. Make your mind up!

[BWFC_Insane]

There is no rule that says a keeper can miss the ball, make contact with the forward to bring them down - so long as they are making a 'saving action'. Whatever Ederson is doing - by the laws of the game - that is a foul. The problem is - its a foul if the keeper misses the ball and makes contact but is rarely given - you see a LOT of those sorts of coming togethers but rarely are they given. By the rules of the game though they are all fouls.

So its the consistency that matters. Either apply the rules or don't. But lets not start making stuff up that doesn't exist.

I'm fairly sure you argued the direct opposite of this, when I said it was correct to award a penalty to Argentina in the WC Semi, when Lloris tried to punch the ball, got nowhere near it and then clattered into Messi. Make your mind up!

I think my point was they just aren't given. Ever. The rules of the game state they should be.

I don't mind if someone makes a call that they either are all given or all aren't unless the keeper prevents a direct effort on goal...but has to be one way or the other.

I watched the Ederson one and my instinctive view (like Messi's) is 'never a pen in a million years' but that's through conditioning we get in seeing these decisions. By the rule book (if that is applied) then both are. But we need consistency either way is my argument.

[Worthy4England]

There is no rule that says a keeper can miss the ball, make contact with the forward to bring them down - so long as they are making a 'saving action'. Whatever Ederson is doing - by the laws of the game - that is a foul. The problem is - its a foul if the keeper misses the ball and makes contact but is rarely given - you see a LOT of those sorts of coming togethers but rarely are they given. By the rules of the game though they are all fouls.

So its the consistency that matters. Either apply the rules or don't. But lets not start making stuff up that doesn't exist.

I'm fairly sure you argued the direct opposite of this, when I said it was correct to award a penalty to Argentina in the WC Semi, when Lloris tried to punch the ball, got nowhere near it and then clattered into Messi. Make your mind up!

I think my point was they just aren't given. Ever. The rules of the game state they should be.

I don't mind if someone makes a call that they either are all given or all aren't unless the keeper prevents a direct effort on goal...but has to be one way or the other.

I watched the Ederson one and my instinctive view (like Messi's) is 'never a pen in a million years' but that's through conditioning we get in seeing these decisions. By the rule book (if that is applied) then both are. But we need consistency either way is my argument.

Glad we've determined it was a penalty then! I'll take that (not the pen, I'd probably put it over the stand). My view on this is that goalkeepers get a lot of protections as it is, them coming for a ball, getting nowhere near it and clattering an attacker, should be a pen always - it's no different than any other position on the field in that regard...

[TANGODANCER]

A football question:

Last night England Women were leading Italy 1-0. Italy attacked and the ball went over the line, presumably for a goal kick. The Italian girl crossed the ball and the ref let play go on despite our girls claiming it was out of play.. Italy then had a header scrambled off our goal line. One of my favourite female players, Valentina Giacinti imediately screeched like a banshee it had crossed the line. The Ref gave a goal.

Question is: Does all the ball have to be over the line or not? If not, the the ref's subsequent decision to allow the goal where all the ball certainly hadn't crossed the line was wrong and it should have been a goal kick. You can't have it both ways. For me, the initial decision should have been a goal kick to us. Luckily we scored again and won.

[Prufrock]

All of the ball has to be over all of line for it to be off the pitch or out of the area. Do they have VAR TD? If not it's possible they just got it wrong.

I mean if so, that's still possible too, like.

[BWFC_Insane]

A football question:

Last night England Women were leading Italy 1-0. Italy attacked and the ball went over the line, presumably for a goal kick. The Italian girl crossed the ball and the ref let play go on despite our girls claiming it was out of play.. Italy then had a header scrambled off our goal line. One of my favourite female players, Valentina Giacinti imediately screeched like a banshee it had crossed the line. The Ref gave a goal.

Question is: Does all the ball have to be over the line or not? If not, the the ref's subsequent decision to allow the goal where all the ball certainly hadn't crossed the line was wrong and it should have been a goal kick. You can't have it both ways. For me, the initial decision should have been a goal kick to us. Luckily we scored again and won.

There was no VAR. You simply cannot tell whether whole of the ball has crossed the line in either instance. Its impossible to say from the angles shown - remember the Japan goal in the world cup - looked 'more' out than this one but VAR showed it in fact was not.

The fact there was no goal-line tech is ridiculous too.

But its entirely possible the ball did not go out of play but did cross the goal line - equally both could be wrong.

[TANGODANCER]

Thanks for the input. As luck would have it it worked out right, but it could so easily have gone the other way. V.A.R. Has to be the only fair answer then there can be no doubt(as in tennis) (Mind you, Kyrgious would probably still question it.

[Harry Genshaw]

The goalline technology is Hawkeye rather than VAR isn't it? Does Hawkeye exist in all 4 professional divisions in the men's game? I mean it should do but since VAR doesn't...

[BWFC_Insane]

The goalline technology is Hawkeye rather than VAR isn't it? Does Hawkeye exist in all 4 professional divisions in the men's game? I mean it should do but since VAR doesn't...

Don't think so. Just premiership isn't it? And play off finals? Unless that's changed.

VAR would have had to look at the first one as it wasn't the goal line itself I think.