FIFA Women's World Cup 2019 || 7 June – 7 July, France

Oct 25, 2017
553
I never seen such a horrible call... it's really infuriating that it was still called after the video review... This just makes me not want to watch this Tournament anymore, takes the wind out of my sails... And I don't even have a dog in this fight (match)

Why it wasn't...
1) The ball was loose, meaning, it wasn't in the possession of the French player, it was just rolling in neutral ground
2) The Norwegian defender had a good piece on it and kicked it away and only...
3) through the follow through, she made unintentional contact with the french player....

No way in hell that's a penalty, just because she got hurt and she was in the way of her kick, come the fuck on!!!
 

Monkey D.

Member
Oct 31, 2017
992
I never seen such a horrible call... it's really infuriating that it was still called after the video review... This just makes me not want to watch this Tournament anymore, takes the wind out of my sails... And I don't even have a dog in this fight (match)

Why it wasn't...
1) The ball was loose, meaning, it wasn't in the possession of the French player, it was just rolling in neutral ground
2) The Norwegian defender had a good piece on it and kicked it away and only...
3) through the follow through, she made unintentional contact with the french player....

No way in hell that's a penalty, just because she got hurt and she was in the way of her kick, come the fuck on!!!
,,in the way of the kick" ^^

it was dangerous play and she made contact with her leg. Penalty.
 

Ganzlinger

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,447
I never seen such a horrible call... it's really infuriating that it was still called after the video review... This just makes me not want to watch this Tournament anymore, takes the wind out of my sails... And I don't even have a dog in this fight (match)

Why it wasn't...
1) The ball was loose, meaning, it wasn't in the possession of the French player, it was just rolling in neutral ground
2) The Norwegian defender had a good piece on it and kicked it away and only...
3) through the follow through, she made unintentional contact with the french player....

No way in hell that's a penalty, just because she got hurt and she was in the way of her kick, come the fuck on!!!
I don't like these calls either, but if you saw Spain vs South Africa, it seems to be some sort of a recommendation.
 

Elynn

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,913
Brittany, France
"It was an accident" isn't a valid argument against dangerous play, don't know why it's even a discussion lol. She barely even touches the ball before going studs up on Torrent's leg, it's careless.
 
OP
OP
Peru

Peru

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,939
Sucks. But a decent effort. And we’ll beat South Korea. But Thorisdottir makes too many critical mistakes.
 
Oct 25, 2017
553
,,in the way of the kick" ^^

it was dangerous play and she made contact with her leg. Penalty.
WRONG!
Not every physical contact in this sport is a foul, and of course there are lots of dangerous plays where players get badly hurt, but there isn't an apparent foul.

Just see any corner kick or long pass where an attacker jumps for the ball , ends up unintentionally colliding with the goalie or a defender, where one of them usually gets elbowed in the jaw etc. usually those aren't called fouls, but they are very dangerous plays and they're sure very physical. this scenario wasn't much different from the example I just gave.


First thing you look at in a review of a foul in this sport is intention of the foul committer. Did he or she intend to tackle, kick or hurt the opponent?

The answer to this is 99% of the time, yes, they did.

And their intention was usually bad, ill fated, they wanted to stop the attacker rather than make any kind of effort to steal the ball.

That's what you call a foul, when .. "Was goign for the ball, instead took out the legs didn't even touch the ball or barely grazed it."

That was not the case here.

1) the Frenchwoman did not even have the ball to begin with, it was not in her possession, she was racing for it.
2)The Norwegian got to it before she did, and she had intentions of booting the ball ( clearing it out of danger)
Did she succeed in kicking the ball? Yes, she got a piece of it and cleared it, She had good intentions, and none of them involved hurting, kicking her opponent.
3) Only after kicking the ball, the follow through made contact with an oncoming player who was also going for the ball.

Sorry but that's not a foul.
 
Oct 25, 2017
553
At least I am explaining why it wasn't, Can someone explain why it was? and "dangerous play" is a sad excuse here.

By All means, if the Norwegian player tried to kick (clear ) the ball and she totally whiffed it while making contact with the French attacker on the follow through, THAT IS a penalty, I 100% agree. Goes back to intention and if they succeeded at what they were intending to do. If your intention was to clear the ball by kicking it away (hard), but instead you didn't touch the ball at all and ended up kicking your opponent in the shins etc. That's foul/penalty. Because you made poor judgement in thinking you can clear the ball, but instead you made a very dangerous play and kicked someone instead... This on the surface looked to be just that. But after the video (slo mo) review, it wasn't that at all, She got there on time, made contact with the ball and cleared it, and the physical contact was made after her making contact with the ball. Not before, not whilst failing to touch the ball etc. after clearing the ball and THAT is the defining difference.
 
Last edited:

Elynn

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,913
Brittany, France
At least I am explaining why it wasn't, Can someone explain why it was? and "dangerous play" is a sad excuse here.
An excuse ? It's literally the rule lmao.

1. Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
• charges
• jumps at
• kicks or attempts to kick
• pushes
• strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
• tackles or challenges
• trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and/or endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off
Now do I really need to explain to you why someone's studs ending up on someone's knee is considered "reckless" ?
 

Monkey D.

Member
Oct 31, 2017
992
WRONG!
Not every physical contact in this sport is a foul, and of course there are lots of dangerous plays where players get badly hurt, but there isn't an apparent foul.

Just see any corner kick or long pass where an attacker jumps for the ball , ends up unintentionally colliding with the goalie or a defender, where one of them usually gets elbowed in the jaw etc. usually those aren't called fouls, but they are very dangerous plays and they're sure very physical. this scenario wasn't much different from the example I just gave.


First thing you look at in a review of a foul in this sport is intention of the foul committer. Did he or she intend to tackle, kick or hurt the opponent?

The answer to this is 99% of the time, yes, they did.

And their intention was usually bad, ill fated, they wanted to stop the attacker rather than make any kind of effort to steal the ball.

That's what you call a foul, when .. "Was goign for the ball, instead took out the legs didn't even touch the ball or barely grazed it."

That was not the case here.

1) the Frenchwoman did not even have the ball to begin with, it was not in her possession, she was racing for it.
2)The Norwegian got to it before she did, and she had intentions of booting the ball ( clearing it out of danger)
Did she succeed in kicking the ball? Yes, she got a piece of it and cleared it, She had good intentions, and none of them involved hurting, kicking her opponent.
3) Only after kicking the ball, the follow through made contact with an oncoming player who was also going for the ball.

Sorry but that's not a foul.
so you are saying 5 professional refs nominated for this World cup ( 4 in VAR) and with Bibiana Steinhaus a 1. Bundesliga Ref( male bundesliga) were wrong after watching the replay and you are right?

:) lets agree to disagree.
 
OP
OP
Peru

Peru

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,939
But the french player played dangerously first, which created the situation, and which was not shown in the var loop for the ref
 
Oct 25, 2017
553
I think it was one (main refs call) not 5.

By All means, if the Norwegian player tried to kick (clear ) the ball and she totally whiffed it while making contact with the French attacker on the follow through, THAT IS a penalty, I 100% agree.

Goes back to intention and if they succeeded at what they were intending to do.

If your intention was to clear the ball by kicking it away (hard), but instead you didn't touch the ball at all and ended up kicking your opponent in the shins etc. That's foul/penalty.

Because you made a poor judgement and a play in thinking you can clear the ball, but instead you made a very dangerous play and kicked someone instead... This on the surface looked to be just that. But after the video (slo mo) review, it wasn't that at all, She got there on time, made contact with the ball and cleared it, and the physical contact was made after her making contact with the ball. Not before, not whilst failing to touch the ball etc. after clearing the ball and THAT is the defining difference.
 

Heshinsi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,126
Edmonton
At least I am explaining why it wasn't, Can someone explain why it was? and "dangerous play" is a sad excuse here.
Do you remember the red card Nani received against Real Madrid where he’s tracking the ball, brings his boot up to control it, and then the Real Madrid player runs into it? Nani wasn’t going for a tackle, his eyes were on the ball all the way through, and the Real Madrid player arrived after he was already engaged, and yet that was a straight red card.


Intent doesn’t protect you from getting carded or giving away a penalty. I thought momentum off of contacting the ball swung her foot upwards, but it is what it is.
 

Tygre

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,306
Chesire, UK
Going over the top of the ball is almost always a foul and a booking at least.

Kicking someone in the knee inside the penalty area is a bad idea if you don't want to concede a penalty.
 

Mory Dunz

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,465
...not sure what position Marta is supposed to be playing.
Cm, LW, and LM. With moments at CF

basically no position.
She's just going after the ball, which makes no sense. I've seen this happen before.

She's going to gassed sprinting back on defense every posession like a CM
and then sprinting to lead the line every possession like a FWD.

10 minutes of Brazil / Australia might already be the best quality of football I've seen so far.
nope
 

Mory Dunz

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,465
Brazil's left side is their best way forward.
Debinha seems better than whenever I saw her last. She's covering the entire wing
edit Tamires is always good.