Topic: Euro 2012

[Ajzzz]

Yeah, guy was offside for the goal that wasn't given and for the good headed chance Ukraine had. Hawk-Eye was testing in Wembley a few weeks ago, it's the system used in cricket and tennis. Every time a England player passed a Ukraine player with the ball they were tripped. Rooney should have scored earlier with a header, Young had a hard time this game but put in four or five amazing crosses, every team left would find it hard to defend against that. Gerrard again doesn't block shots properly, it will be a miracle if it doesn't cost England a goal. Ukraine weren't able to create as many clear chances as England, without Shevchenko they didn't have the quality in the final third, England had a plan to draw and the game went better than expected.

You cannot jump into a tackle with studs showing, it's dangerous play. I didn't see Ćorluka jump at Busquets, all I saw was Busquets holding Ćorluka before, during, and after his jump. It's one of the clearest penalties I have ever seen.

[klintistvud]

I don't think you understand the rules.

Corluka fouls Busquets first: by 'jumping at him' and 'holding'
Busquets fouls back by 'holding'.

In isolation the correct call is to give a direct free kick for the first foul, Corluka's. But consideringthe ball went out for a goal kick, no call is necessary.

Also Ramos got the ball first. The other guy kicks him. Ramos is not committingthe dangerous play you suggest, as he is not sliding into the player, rather he slides across the front of him and wins the ball. The croatian player initiates the contact by trying--too late--to kick the ball. So yes it's a foul, a direct free kick for Spain for 'kicking'.

The call in the England game was great. An official whose sole purpose is to tell if the ball crossed the line gets it completely wrong from the perfect position. It was definitely in. Fortunately for England that call made up for the offside call tht was missed in the buildup.

Even if it had been given Ukraine go out on head to head right? It changes nothing. (though it could have changed the game)

It was a very nice example of why we cannot persist with trying to use people to do a machines job.

For Corluka's supposed foul - what Ajzzz said. You can't place yourself directly behind the player, grab his hand and cry foul after he tries to jump and you rotate him 90° in the mid-air.

Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is defined as any action that, while
trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player
himself). It is committed with an opponent nearby and prevents the opponent
from playing the ball for fear of injury.
A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that, in the opinion of the
referee, it is not dangerous to an opponent.
Playing in a dangerous manner involves no physical contact between the
players. If there is physical contact, the action becomes an offence punishable
with a direct free kick or penalty kick. In the case of physical contact, the
referee should carefully consider the high probability that misconduct has also
been committed.

Disciplinary sanctions
• If a player plays in a dangerous manner in a “normal” challenge, the
referee should not take any disciplinary action. If the action is made with
obvious risk of injury, the referee should caution the player
• If a player denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity by playing in a
dangerous manner, the referee should send off the player

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/28/interpretation_law12_en.pdf

@00:15

oko sokolovo 18.6.

[alexbutterfield]

You're in denial if you can't see that Corluka fouls first. Technically it is a combination of jumping at, and holding. More commonly people refer to it as climbing. If e wasn't climbing all over Busquests he wouldn't have even been in a position for Busquets to grab him.

And I understand the dangerous play rule. I just think you don't know how to interpret it. The croatian player kicks Ramos after Ramos gets the ball. It is the Croatian player who is playing dangerously, by being a little too slow. Ramos has eery right to play the ball in te way he did, if it were not for the Croat kicking him there would have been no contact.

If Ramos made that same tackle from a different angle--diving in tiwards the attacker--so that his follow through was unavoidable by the player then it would be dangerous play. But he doesn't. He slides alongside the player who turns and kicks him.

I'm sure to you this sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but you have to look at these calls as who initiates the contact.

[klintistvud]

You're in denial if you can't see that Corluka fouls first. Technically it is a combination of jumping at, and holding. More commonly people refer to it as climbing. If e wasn't climbing all over Busquests he wouldn't have even been in a position for Busquets to grab him.

If Busquets hadn't been holding his arm, Corluka would have been in position to jump and score easily.

@0:17 before the jump you can see Busquets holding Corluka's arm.

osamdesetsesta

And I understand the dangerous play rule. I just think you don't know how to interpret it. The croatian player kicks Ramos after Ramos gets the ball. It is the Croatian player who is playing dangerously, by being a little too slow. Ramos has eery right to play the ball in te way he did, if it were not for the Croat kicking him there would have been no contact.

If Ramos made that same tackle from a different angle--diving in tiwards the attacker--so that his follow through was unavoidable by the player then it would be dangerous play. But he doesn't. He slides alongside the player who turns and kicks him.

I'm sure to you this sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but you have to look at these calls as who initiates the contact.

Now that is just goddamn hillarious.

[TalkingBook]

You're in denial if you can't see that Corluka fouls first. Technically it is a combination of jumping at, and holding. More commonly people refer to it as climbing. If e wasn't climbing all over Busquests he wouldn't have even been in a position for Busquets to grab him.

And I understand the dangerous play rule. I just think you don't know how to interpret it. The croatian player kicks Ramos after Ramos gets the ball. It is the Croatian player who is playing dangerously, by being a little too slow. Ramos has eery right to play the ball in te way he did, if it were not for the Croat kicking him there would have been no contact.

If Ramos made that same tackle from a different angle--diving in tiwards the attacker--so that his follow through was unavoidable by the player then it would be dangerous play. But he doesn't. He slides alongside the player who turns and kicks him.

I'm sure to you this sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but you have to look at these calls as who initiates the contact.

For what it's worth, all the German commentators and their ex-ref rules expert said this should have been a free kick for Croatia, no question.

[stretcher]

I thought this thread was about currency or economics, I start reading it's about soccer and *head hits desk*

zzZZZZzzzZZZzzzzzZZzzzzzZZzzzzZZzzzzzzzz

[alexbutterfield]

Corluka clearly jumps over Busquets back, and Ramos clearly gets the ball first. That's pretty much the only relevant info.

[Lukas]

Corluka clearly jumps over Busquets back, and Ramos clearly gets the ball first. That's pretty much the only relevant info.

Regardless of whether he gets the ball first, the referee can (and probably should) call dangerous play when he goes in with the studs first at full speed like in this case. It is a recipe for dangerous injuries, and that is what the "dangerous play" rule is supposed to prevent. Of course it would only be an indirect free kick in that case, certainly no penalty kick.

[Shadow Of A Doubt]

Corluka clearly jumps over Busquets back, and Ramos clearly gets the ball first. That's pretty much the only relevant info.

Regardless of whether he gets the ball first, the referee can (and probably should) call dangerous play when he goes in with the studs first at full speed like in this case. It is a recipe for dangerous injuries, and that is what the "dangerous play" rule is supposed to prevent. Of course it would only be an indirect free kick in that case, certainly no penalty kick.

It's a borderline case, but I disagree. He slides in (not diving in with both feet of the ground) so he is not going to ram the Croat with his full weight if he times it wrong; he slides side-on so he will not follow-through onto the opponent's shins; and he gets the ball first. The studs are only up because the ball is off the ground.

[klintistvud]

Playing in a dangerous manner is defined as any action that, while
trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player
himself). It is committed with an opponent nearby and prevents the opponent
from playing the ball for fear of injury.
A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that, in the opinion of the
referee, it is not dangerous to an opponent.
Playing in a dangerous manner involves no physical contact between the
players. If there is physical contact, the action becomes an offence punishable
with a direct free kick or penalty kick. In the case of physical contact, the
referee should carefully consider the high probability that misconduct has also
been committed.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/28/interpretation_law12_en.pdf

[amysrevenge]

The important part is that if educated people without a vested interest in the coutcome are still arguing about it hours/days later, then either interpretation from a referee with no warning or time to reflect has gotta be acceptable, in the end.

[Shadow Of A Doubt]

Of course that's the law, you couldn't have someone making a leg-breaking challenge and getting away with it because the opponent jumped out of the way.

Any challenge carries with it some risk of injury because that is the nature of sport. You can get injured with no-one around you. So the sport has had to decide what risks are excessive and unnecessary, and which ones are intrinsic to the nature of the game.

Controlled slide-challenges where you get the ball first are part of the game. Going over the ball into someone's shins is not, nor is jumping into a challenge two-footed because those types of challenge broke player's legs on a regular basis. Clashing heads with your opponent when challenging for an aerial ball is not necessarily a foul, but elbowing them certainly is. How many times are keepers penalised for punching the ball and making contact with their own defender? Never, because context is everything with these calls.

Ramos slid in and got the ball, he would have made no contact if the Croat hadn't kicked him because he was too slow to play the ball himself. If he had taken the standing foot during the challenge, or if the Croat had been a bit quicker, it would have been a foul. If he had accidentally stamped on someone's foot when going for a ball (in a different scenario) that would have been a foul. Having an opponent kick your studs is not a foul unless your follow-through would have studded his foot anyway.

ETA - this post dedicated to William the Conqueror.

[klintistvud]

That was not a controlled slide challenge, watch the video (post #61)  @0:26 Ramos is at least 20cm in the air, if Mandzukic had been faster he could have ended up with a serious injury, and yes, that is the whole point of the dangerous play rule.

If a similar situation had happened in a league game between the two middle-of-the-table teams (or even the other way around in the Cro-Spa game) the referee would have ruled a dangerous play without hesitation, and we wouldn't have a discussion like this.


I'm just curious, is there anyone here who watched the post game analysis (at any network) where the people commented that the Ramos' tackle wasn't a foul/dangerous play?

[Shadow Of A Doubt]

Yes, the BBC said it wasn't a foul as well. Maybe it's a difference between countries, but I would not expect that to be a foul in the EPL.

[alexbutterfield]

Shadow is spot on.

You can't argue 'if Mandzukic was faster...' because he wasn't. If he was it would be a different situation warranting a different call. It doesn't change this situation.

Ramos slid alongside Mandzukic. Not at him. The slide wasn't dangerous, it was Mandzukic's kick, which was late, that was dangerous (mostly to himself, but also to Ramos).

Again, it is all about who initiates the contact. In this instance it is Mandzukic who does so. It is clear to see. He tries to kick the ball, but is too late and kicks Ramos instead. If he doesn't kick, or pulls out, there is no contact.

I would have understood had the ref given a penalty, because it was a very close call. The first couple times I saw it I thought Mandzukic got the ball first and Ramis played the man, but in slow motion it is clearly the other way round.

In response to Lukas. Dangerous play covers anything where contact is not made. If this was called a foul--say if Mandzukic did get there first--then it would have been adjudged as 'kicking' by Ramos. Resulting in a penalty kick.

Rule of thumb is, if there is contact, it's not dangerous play, and not an indirect kick.