It was actually a pretty good game for a season debut by both teams. It's true that it wasn't that well played but it was exciting and pretty fast. Benfica overall was OK but Melgarejo is even worse than Emerson and without Aimar your midfield is simply not the same thing. Braga was very good defending but they didn't show much upfront and were lucky in both goals.I'm pissed because I couldn't watch the whole game but from what I saw we weren't good yesterday, does anyone have an image of the ball that we put in the back of the net and was called back? The Custodio was the one that cut the ball with his hand, I think the ref wanted to go soft on Douglao but that should have been a straight red either way.
Thank you for your input of the game, however Luisao never fouled Ricardo, Peseiro already admited it and so did Ricardo, see min 0:33 if there were ever any questions:It was actually a pretty good game for a season debut by both teams. It's true that it wasn't that well played but it was exciting and pretty fast. Benfica overall was OK but Melgarejo is even worse than Emerson and without Aimar your midfield is simply not the same thing. Braga was very good defending but they didn't show much upfront and were lucky in both goals.
About the pseudo 3rd goal by Benfica it's understandable why it was disallowed. Cardozo just slightly touched Beto but he barged onto him and inside the goalkeeper's box we all know that refs don't give much chances to flying strikers...unless you are called Luisão and you're playing Sporting.
The final score was fair and what really impressed me most was Jesus comments after the game, praising the quality of the opponent team and congratulating the ref for a good performance. Someone must have put some xanax on his chewing gum.
No, it shouldn't because fouls are given not only when there is contact but also when there is a clear intention to have it, which was the case here. When that movement happened I was actually following Cardozo's movements and not the ball and I could see how he simply ignored the ball and only searched the contact with the keeper. He failed hitting him but he tried his best to do it and it was silly of him to do so as, if he didn't, the goal would have probably stood.Cardozo hardly touched Beto if at all with the disallowed third goal.
His intention may have been to barge into him from his action but it didn't materialise If there was any contact it was miniscule in the extreme. If there is always talk of goalkeepers being over protected then this was a big highlight of that.
Should have stood.
The referee thought it was dangerous and I also think so, that is why he called the foul. In any case nobody from Benfica criticized the ref's decision so it seems there is not much substance in this "case".Being cautioned and pulled up for a foul that doesn't exist but is seen as intent usually occurs when the play is deemed violent or dangerous. Cardozo's action in the box was neither dangerous or violent. It looked like he was trying to just block off Beto but failed and missed him or hardly brushed him at all.