Xtratime Community banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Marseille vs Liverpool @ Velodrome - OMT

Jump to Latest
41 - 60 of 75 Posts
#42 ·
And I here I was thinking that was Drogba's rugby tackle that meant it was disallowed.

Out of interest, why was the foul called at the point the foul was committed and not a foot or so further forward at the end of the foul?
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#43 ·
for watching very often EPL and strikers like shearer, drogba's goal was a fair goal in my opinion.

now, like said marmotte, a fault is sanctionned at the end of it, and the guy has pulling marlet's short during 3 meters.
 
#44 ·
marmotte said:
well it seems that only a few here does know the rule:
in case of pulling the shirt or the short of the opposite player, it's the END of the foul that counts for the freekick (in that case the penalty).
so the ref was right here.
btw he made a lot of mistakes otherwise.
Click to expand...
This sounds absurd. Sorry to say but I think marmotte is trying to find reasons to justify the penalty awarded. End result mattered only? So if I punch the ball into the net, so the goal will stand since the foul took place first but not a problem since at the end of the foul it is a goal, so a goal should be allowed.

Mmm... Then we should have a goal cos though Owen fouled the Bald One, the Bald One went into the net WITH the ball. :rolleyes:

paw;)
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#45 ·
paw said:

Mmm... Then we should have a goal cos though Owen fouled the Bald One, the Bald One went into the net WITH the ball. :rolleyes:

paw;)
Click to expand...
a goalie is sacred, you don't have to touch him, and anyway barthez didn't entering in the net with the ball, watch again the replay;)
 
#46 ·
wow you didn't read all my post, did you ?
i was talking about pulling shirts and shorts, not tackling or other faults !
of course when you tackle a player badly, the fault is where you first touch him.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#47 ·
no you are still wrong.

It is when the "foul" first happens, ie: outside the box.
Unless you are trying to change the rules to suit your own cause?

Hey are you Leonard Johanssen??? ;)
 
#48 ·
well it seems the rule there changed for the wc 2002
a similar fault was called for the turkish if i remember well
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#49 ·
Balis-of-Steel said:
no you are still wrong.

It is when the "foul" first happens, ie: outside the box.
Unless you are trying to change the rules to suit your own cause?
Click to expand...
You are both wrong, I have undergone referee education. And I seen the Swedish referee base explain this issue. the rules state that the Referee can judge to put the freekick/penalty at any place DURING the offense. It is not ealry or late, it is a judegement issue. Note, the fall or whatever does not count, only the actual offense which can be on several place in a shirt tug. On a trip it is easier as then it should be exactly where their legs connected.

In this case it surerly would have been more fair if he took it outside, especially since I doubt any part of the offense was inside.
 
#50 ·
It was a penalty, simple as. Hooflier's pathetic excuses after the game were just like the ones he made after the Saints game, blaming everyone except himself.
 
#51 ·
Doc_Rule said:
It was a penalty, simple as. Hooflier's pathetic excuses after the game were just like the ones he made after the Saints game, blaming everyone except himself.
Click to expand...
ah, thank you:)

marlet has been faster than the defender, he would have go straight ahead the net. the fault is anti-game and deserved a red + a penalty because pulling disturbed in the penalty box.
 
#52 ·
It was a red card offense and a penalty without doubt. The referee could stop the game any time during the continuing offence, but he let the play to develop and pointed to a penalty kick after it was clear that the scoring chance was seriously affected by the offence. He was absolutely right to do so according to the rules. If the guy scored there would be no penalty. Some of you either don't know the rules or are outdated on them by a decade.

Besides, even if there were no penalty given, Biscan had to go for sure, and Liverpool would lose this game in any case, so I don’t understand what all the fuss is about. Only GH can convince himself that they would win if not for the referee.
 
#53 ·
Inter will teach us [liverpool] a lesson?? in what?? anti-football?? get hammered?? terrible discipline. Benfica will be our q/f opponents.

you got knocked out of CL cos you are crap.

No trophies for you this season, no CL next season. Yeah Inter are great.

-Doc Rule ~ a month ago in Man Utd forum thread "ever hear of a defense"

FACTS:

Inter made it to QF to face Marseille. But I thought Benfica would be your q/f opponents?
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#54 ·
How exactly was it a penalty or have the rules suddenly been changed from when the offence is committed to when the Ref can cause maximum damage.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#55 ·
Gutted. Absolutely gutted, felt sorry for the travelling fans who were first class, singing until the end.

This has really highlighted that the number one priority over the summer, more than a right winger, is a centre-back with speed. I think Houllier will definitely have one on his shopping list for the summer.

It's going to be a real challenge to get the players up again for the rest of the season, last night was a huge body blow.

paw, I disagree with your judgment that no one of our players tried to play football after the sending off. Like CardiffRed said, we were well and truly pinned back after their penalty until half-time, as we were completely shell-shocked by the absymal decision to give a penalty for a foul five yards outside the box.

The second half started with us taking the initiative and they'd only had the play for a few minutes when they scored; after Hyypia put it out for a corner when he should have made sure they got only a throw-in at best. After that it was six and two threes, they always looked dangerous to me on the counter, especially down the flanks as we were palying with three at the back, but we also had them pinned back in their penalty area for long spells. So much so that their coach was urging them to get forward. You don't normally see this from a side down to ten men, especially away from home so to say we didn't try to play paints a false picture.

Ultimately, we just weren't good enough to get the goal back with ten men. If it was XI v XI I think it would have been a different story and, as others have said, we were clearly the better team for the first 35 odd minutes and were in complete control. Like in most matches we've lost recently you can look at the match again and see the pivotal turning point, last night it was obviously the sending off.

I don't think the substitutes were disgraceful either. Baros on for Owen was natural as he felt a tight hamstring; Murphy should never have started and was never upto the pace. Bringing Sinama on was a last roll of the dice and the logic was that he'd stretch their defence a bit more and perhaps use his pace to create a chance or get on the end of something. But it wasn't to be and the season just goes from bad to worse.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#59 ·
Oh god not a trainee ref.

Anyone with common sense have an explanation?
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#60 ·
CardiffRed said:
Anyone with common sense have an explanation?
Click to expand...
when my best friend CardiffRed is asking i would have to oblige. :)

ok, I, as a referee will explain, and plz note, nobody paid me any money to say this. ;)

you guys are confusing several things. First of all there are always some sort of changes to the rules every year. Each referee gets a new book of rules each year and first thing that he sees there is the list of changes.

Now specifically to the incident. Red card and a penalty no doubts about that. What I think is misleading for some of you, guys, to think that it shouldn't have been a PK, since the foul originated outside pen box, is the nature of the foul. Had Biscan tripped Marlet's legs a yard outside the box with having the latter landing inside the area you would've been 100% correct - no PK, direct free kick + red card. That would've been the case where the rule says (and it hasn't ever been changed) "where the foul originated" and not where the player landed. Now, to better illustrate what happened in our case, pretend Biscan wasn't trying to pull the shorts off Marlet but was punching him. First punch occured a yard outside, both players keep running, Biscan throws three more punches inside the box the last of which knocks the player out. Biscan would be sent off no doubts, but would that be a PK or a free? The answer is... :) had referee blown his wistle the very instant Igor grabbed Marlet's pants (or threw the first punch), i.e. while the play was outside then its a free kick. However if the ref allows the game to continue, in other words ignoring the foul, thus giving advantage to the attacking team (as he was instructed), but the defender still keeps fouling and now the game is already INSIDE the box, then Marlet pulls the trigger while Biscan is throwing him off-balance and the ball goes wide... how on earth it's not a pk and the red card? if that is the logic then if there was a foul 20 yards outside the box and ref decided to give the advantage, the game continued and episode ended with the attacking player being chopped down in the goal mouth, the decision should be - free kick 20 yards outside the box. :cool:

btw houllier is cretin, and so are GolTV commentators.
 
41 - 60 of 75 Posts
About this Discussion
74 Replies
23 Participants
Last post:
zico
Xtratime Community
posts
12M
members
26K
Since
1999
Xtratime Football is an interactive global sports and entertainment community focused on World Football. Come and join the team!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
World Football Inter Milan Serbian Football Juventus