SF1: Argentina vs Croatia, 7PM GMT, Lusail Iconic Stadium

[kopsy101]

35 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Forget about penalties, just go over the cards and fouls in every match they play and tell it's 50-50.

Anyone who's played football knows constant slight protection of a team is way more infuriating that one bad decision.

Refereeing Argentina has had so far is the refereeing any fan would want for their team, every 50-50 situation went their way, alongside leniency with cards.

(Just before haters jump in, Croatia had awful setup last night and we wouldn't have scored if we played for two more days, I'm talking about the tournament in general.)

Got to disagree, I thought the ref for the Dutch game was just flipping a coin every time. Consistenly inconsistent and decisions went both ways. Handing out yellows to both teams like sweeties but both teams could have had reds. I disagree because you said every 50-50 which is obviously untrue, I do think Argentina did get slightly more decisions their way however. 

Similar in the England France game, a couple of the high profile decisions went France's way but there were some blatant fouls that didn't get called the opposite way but nobody will remember that. 

[Astafjevs]

'Needs to make sure he gets some contact on the ball otherwise it will be classed as a foul'

'Does he!?'

[Barry Cartman]

23 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

This is amazing  

but where was the goalie supposed to go!!!!

It would be perfect if they added Ally McCoist coming in saying he doesn't know what the lads in the studio are talking about 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Barry Cartman

[Smallen]

some of ITV's punditry has been absolutely surreal. 

I'd expect better from Wright normally as well. 

[Barry Cartman]

One thing i'd like to bring up about the penalty, is I don't see the difference between that and the Lloris & Wilson incident, which at the time I insisted should have been a foul, but most on here was using the Neville where was he supposed to go excuse 

both Wilson and Croatian goalie stop, its Lloris and Alvarez who knock the ball past and then run into the other 

If you think it was a penalty last night like most in here seem to, I don't see how it was the opposite in the other thread 

[Coulthard's Jaw]

26 minutes ago, Smallen said:

some of ITV's punditry has been absolutely surreal. 

I'd expect better from Wright normally as well. 

I felt it was Neville going big on it and Keane/Wright almost couldn't be bothered having the argument.

Also, Pougatch is really bad and I feel like the people behind the scenes aren't great either?

[Smallen]

1 minute ago, Coulthard's Jaw said:

I felt it was Neville going big on it and Keane/Wright almost couldn't be bothered having the argument.

Also, Pougatch is really bad and I feel like the people behind the scenes aren't great either?

They are the people who have decided Sam Matterface is an adequate lead commentator for years so…  

[Barry Cartman]

Wright seemed like someone who begrudgingly just wanted to fit in during that half time discussion 

[Coulthard's Jaw]

11 minutes ago, Smallen said:

They are the people who have decided Sam Matterface is an adequate lead commentator for years so…  

Heh. Also, it was ITV who completely shat the bed after Germany went out wasn't it? Just really poor all round from them this World Cup.

[Coulthard's Jaw]

I find Keane on ITV really uncomfortable viewing btw  on Sky there's a bit more space for his act and also he has a decent on screen chemistry with a lot of the gang there. On ITV they don't really have time for his bit and also they are all so bloody serious, doesn't work for me.

[GunmaN1905]

8 minutes ago, Barry Cartman said:

If you think it was a penalty last night like most in here seem to, I don't see how it was the opposite in the other thread 

Situations like these is why football has become extremely frustrating to watch at times, there's no consistency at all.

We all know about the handball issues, offsides getting more annoying with shoulder nonsense, these kind of fouls being another thing.

They should just introduce the "established position" rule. If the defender (or goalkeeper) has established position, it should never be a defense foul.

Established as in his feet on the ground and not moving towards the attacker. Easy to implement and officiate. Knocking ball past someone and then smashing into them shouldn't be a foul. Especially if it's a goalkeeper that's not sliding towards the attacker.

[Barry Cartman]

5 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Established as in his feet on the ground and not moving towards the attacker. Easy to implement and officiate. Knocking ball past someone and then smashing into them shouldn't be a foul. Especially if it's a goalkeeper that's not sliding towards the attacker.

There should be more consistency of course, but if 2 players are going for the ball and 1 wins it and knocks it past the other, who has now blocked the path and a collision happens, then it should also be a foul, like it would be anywhere on the pitch. The idea of where is he supposed to go is just nonsense, if you go in to get the ball and you don't touch it, you are responsible for impeding the other player who did get the ball 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Barry Cartman

[Smallen]

9 minutes ago, Coulthard's Jaw said:

Heh. Also, it was ITV who completely shat the bed after Germany went out wasn't it? Just really poor all round from them this World Cup.

The 1st of December.

I didn't switch over to the Germany/Costa Rica game so I don't know how bad that was, but it was Spain vs Japan where the punditry was especially bad. The commentators and then the pundits (particularly Neville and Souness) all ****** themselves silly over Spain and how they were going to win the world cup despite them spending 45 minutes passing it between their midfield and defence and going in just 1-0 up against a really bad Japan performance. Souness in particular at half time said something like "why can't the England national team play like this? ". It was just silly. Japan of course came out and scored a couple of goals in the second half whilst Spain didn't even have a shot for 40 minutes. Meanwhile the pundits all acted shocked and wondered how on earth it had happened . There was loads of other stuff too. 

It was the worst I've ever seen/heard and the bar was incredibly low to start with. 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Smallen

[themadsheep2001]

I have no idea why ITV consistently produce bad TV because the talent behind the screen is brilliant. 

[The_jagster]

I thought Wilson fouled Lloris too

I didn't actually watch the halftime stuff so was hearing that for the first time, imagine making Peter Walton look like a man talking sense

[GunmaN1905]

2 minutes ago, Barry Cartman said:

There should be more consistency of course, but if 2 players are going for the ball and 1 wins it and knocks it past the other, who has now blocked the path and a collision happens, then it should also be a foul, like it would be anywhere on the pitch. The idea of where is he supposed to go is just nonsense, if you go in get the ball and you don't touch it, you are responsible for impeding the other player who did get the ball 

The thing is that you're going to implement this logic for goalkeepers, more and more strikers will just start smashing into them.

Livaković makes a natural save motion, doesn't dive, doesn't get into Alvarez.

The ball is already out and he's trying to make a save. Alvarez just smashes into him. It's goalkeeper's area, after all.

The logic if someone touched the ball is just stupid at times. So you're telling me that if they both had same motions, Livaković had his fingertip on the ball which minimally changes direction and speed, it would've been Alvarez's foul? To me that just defies logic completely. 

I would've said it's 100% a foul if Alvarez deliberately tried to dribble past the goalkeeper and wasn't making a shot.

Another situation was Nunez against Ghana which was ridiculous. Him and defender are right next to each other, defender gets the slightest touch on the ball, barely changes it's trajection and completely takes Nunez out who would've had the ball in goalscoring situation and it's not a penalty? Just a joke that we can have so many cameras, VAR room and referees but not use common sense.

Clearing the ball out of play with a sliding tackle and just barely touching it and taking the attacker with you should be completely different things. Having a slight touch on the ball shouldn't give you a permission to take someone out.

Meh, idk. As I said, so much technology and so many decisions which a borderline nonsense and would've been officiated better with just common sense and no technology. VAR was implemented to minimize the errors, but most big matches have some kind of VAR shambles which are talked about more than football.

But then again, this wasn't a yellow for Orsato, so who knows, he has his own rules.

Spoiler

 

 

[The_jagster]

I watched the highlights in normal speed again last night, it is clear as day that Livakovic comes out, doesn't get there, but is still moving forward even as he slows up. The idea that he was just standing still and had nowhere to go is nonsense

[Coulthard's Jaw]

16 minutes ago, themadsheep2001 said:

I have no idea why ITV consistently produce bad TV because the talent behind the screen is brilliant. 

Like, that penalty debate last night, if you have one pundit making that argument and another disagreeing with them, that's good TV. All of them agreeing with each other and then getting cross with Walton was just naff  

Edited December 14, 2022 by Coulthard's Jaw

[kopsy101]

25 minutes ago, Barry Cartman said:

One thing i'd like to bring up about the penalty, is I don't see the difference between that and the Lloris & Wilson incident, which at the time I insisted should have been a foul, but most on here was using the Neville where was he supposed to go excuse 

both Wilson and Croatian goalie stop, its Lloris and Alvarez who knock the ball past and then run into the other 

If you think it was a penalty last night like most in here seem to, I don't see how it was the opposite in the other thread 

I see your point and they are very similar. But Lloris isn't in control of that, it's clumsily thigh'd into open space. That really could have gone either way though, but that's my interpretation.

Alvarez is in control as he shoots. The keeper doesn't stop, and nor does Alvarez. However, he had control of the ball so the onus is on the keeper to get the ball and avoid the player which he doesn't.

That's my 2 cents.

[The_jagster]

@GunmaN1905iI think with Nunez that there was a handball before it got to the penalty claim? Therefore it may have been a foul but VAR decided it was a handball first.

[Coulthard's Jaw]

20 minutes ago, Smallen said:

The 1st of December.

I didn't switch over to the Germany/Costa Rica game so I don't know how bad that was, but it was Spain vs Japan where the punditry was especially bad. The commentators and then the pundits (particularly Neville and Souness) all ****** themselves silly over Spain and how they were going to win the world cup despite them spending 45 minutes passing it between their midfield and defence and going in just 1-0 up against a really bad Japan performance. Souness in particular at half time said something like "why can't the England national team play like this? ". It was just silly. Japan of course came out and scored a couple of goals in the second half whilst Spain didn't even have a shot for 40 minutes. Meanwhile the pundits all acted shocked and wondered how on earth it had happened . There was loads of other stuff too. 

It was the worst I've ever seen/heard and the bar was incredibly low to start with. 

haha yeah Souness and Spain was amazing  

[TokyoWanderer]

Gunman have you watched a repeat of the play or just photos? The GK is not standing ffs and the play is nothing like the Lloris-Wilson play.

Edit:

"Just standing his ground" Yeah, while a streching the leg in full to the side the player is running into 

Edited December 14, 2022 by TokyoWanderer

[GunmaN1905]

1 minute ago, TokyoWanderer said:

Gunman have you watched a repeat of the play or just photos? The GK is not standing ffs and the play is nothing like the Lloris-Wilson play.

Yes, I have watched the replay, goalkeeper stops a few meters before Alvarez gets to him and tries to make a save, while still being on his feet.

After Woj's finger onto Messi's eyelash and all the nonsense with the likes of Lewandowski stutter-stepping, but goalkeepers being penalized for stepping off the line a split-second later, soon there won't be anything to do, just remove the goalkeepers alltogether.

Even five years ago that would've never been a foul, goalkeeper is trying to make a save and attacker goes into him. Attacker that doesn't have control of the ball.

8 minutes ago, The_jagster said:

@GunmaN1905iI think with Nunez that there was a handball before it got to the penalty claim? Therefore it may have been a foul but VAR decided it was a handball first.

I don't think so, they reviewed it for quite a long time and at the end we got like a dozen replays of defender getting a slight touch on the ball. Noone ever mentioned handball.

[Barry Cartman]

10 minutes ago, kopsy101 said:

I see your point and they are very similar. But Lloris isn't in control of that, it's clumsily thigh'd into open space. That really could have gone either way though, but that's my interpretation.

Alvarez is in control as he shoots. The keeper doesn't stop, and nor does Alvarez. However, he had control of the ball so the onus is on the keeper to get the ball and avoid the player which he doesn't.

That's my 2 cents.

I wouldn't say Alvarez is in control of the ball, I think we'd all agree the only reason he wins a penalty is because his effort to put it over the goalie and into the net was tame, which lead to it still being in reach and the collision causes a foul. If Alvarez had made better contact and the ball say landed on the roof of the net, he wouldn't have won a penalty as the goalie wouldn't have deemed to have impeded him 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Barry Cartman

[TokyoWanderer]

hace 1 minuto, GunmaN1905 dijo:

Yes, I have watched the replay, goalkeeper stops a few meters before Alvarez gets to him and tries to make a save, while still being on his feet.

Well, the problem is here then. Maybe watch again because Livakovic neither stops or is on his feet.

[TokyoWanderer]

hace 17 minutos, GunmaN1905 dijo:

 

 

  Revelar contenido oculto

 

 

In this picture Livakovic is lunging forward into a running player who got to the ball first. He is the one causing the collision.

[GunmaN1905]

3 minutes ago, TokyoWanderer said:

In this picture Livakovic is lunging forward into a running player who got to the ball first. He is the one causing the collision.

How is he lunging forward, he is in a natural goalkeeping motion of trying to save a shot. Look at his left foot, it's planted on the ground.

He is not diving at the striker, he is making himself bigger to try and block the shot in a textbook goalkeeper fashion.

Much like Woj was trying to clear the ball in a textbook goalkeeper fashion.

And that's the entire problem. Goalkeepers making natural motions, in their own area, getting penalized for strikers running into them.

Whatever, what's the point of arguing with people who don't know the basics of goalkeeping.

[TokyoWanderer]

hace 3 minutos, GunmaN1905 dijo:

How is he lunging forward, he is in a natural goalkeeping motion of trying to save a shot. Look at his left foot, it's planted on the ground.

He is not diving at the striker, he is making himself bigger to try and block the shot in a textbook goalkeeper fashion.

Much like Woj was trying to clear the ball in a textbook goalkeeper fashion.

And that's the entire problem. Goalkeepers making natural motions, in their own area, getting penalized for strikers running into them.

Whatever, what's the point of arguing with people who don't know the basics of goalkeeping.

I know the basics of goalkeeping. You are just being a biased crybaby here if you don't see that Livakovic is lunging forward and causing the collision.

Edited December 14, 2022 by TokyoWanderer

[GunmaN1905]

7 minutes ago, TokyoWanderer said:

I know the basics of goalkeeping. You are just being a biased crybaby here if you don't see that Livakovic is lunging forward and causing the collision.

How is he lunging forward if he's still on his feet before Alvarez hits him?

What exactly is a goalkeeper supposed to do in that situation?

He takes a textbook goalkeeper position to make himself bigger to try and stop the shot.

Alvarez is sprinting directly towards him, into his area and position (or trajectory if you will) goalkeeper established.

Now please do tell me how could've Livaković tried to save the shot and avoided collision without reducing his chances of making a save?

And another question, which noone wants to answer. If he got a slight touch on the ball, but it was still or minimally changed trajectory, what then? Is it suddenly Alvarez's foul? That's the damn point I'm trying to make since last night, but noone wants to answer.

The foul should be about who initiates the contact and who had established position, not if someone got a slight touch on the ball. Because we all know that it would've been Alvarez's foul if Livaković touched the ball. Which just makes no sense.

That was literally an "unwinnable" situation for a goalkeeper.

[Barry Cartman]

12 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

And another question, which noone wants to answer. If he got a slight touch on the ball, but it was still or minimally changed trajectory, what then? Is it suddenly Alvarez's foul? That's the damn point I'm trying to make since last night, but noone wants to answer.

If he got a fingertip to it then it wouldn't be a foul, don't think that really needed answering as the whole debate is the goalie didn't get to the ball 

[GunmaN1905]

3 minutes ago, Barry Cartman said:

If he got a fingertip to it then it wouldn't be a foul, don't think that really needed answering as the whole debate is the goalie didn't get to the ball 

But that's just ridiculous and stupid logic to apply the rule.

Fingertip makes it not a foul, despite Alvarez having the same chance to get the ball because trajectory is more or less the same.

That's how Nunez situation played out.

What a game.

[Bootador]

My take:

[Barry Cartman]

2 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

But that's just ridiculous and stupid logic to apply the rule.

Fingertip makes it not a foul, despite Alvarez having the same chance to get the ball because trajectory is more or less the same.

That's how Nunez situation played out.

What a game.

Thats the basics of football, its the only same as a defender sliding in and the difference between a clean tackle and a foul can be the other player kicking the ball at their foot/leg so it isn't a foul, or them chipping it over their foot causing a foul 

[Pukey]

Still images are a dreadful way of judging most incidents, especially last night's. 

[kopsy101]

1 hour ago, Barry Cartman said:

I wouldn't say Alvarez is in control of the ball, I think we'd all agree the only reason he wins a penalty is because his effort to put it over the goalie and into the net was tame, which lead to it still being in reach and the collision causes a foul. If Alvarez had made better contact and the ball say landed on the roof of the net, he wouldn't have won a penalty as the goalie wouldn't have deemed to have impeded him 

I appreciate that and I agree that he wins the pen because Lovren fluffed the clearance back into a space where he would have been. I just think that Alvarez had the ball and the keeper made a movement towards the ball and made himself big, which missed the ball and took man who was moving forward, which he's allowed to do. Like, he didn't change his trajectory to move into him and as it was him with the ball, it's kinda his call where he goes.

Like I said, I appreciate people have different interpretations.

 

[Constantine]

We're discussing that penalty way too much. IMO, it was 50/50 decision and Orsato went with what he thought was right. Despite him being who he is, the fact we're still discussing it without "proper" conclusion show how close of a call that was.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Constantine

[TokyoWanderer]

I don't want to be thick, but looking at the video I'm posting below, it is hard for me to understand how anyone can consider this a 50/50 play.

"He is still on his feet" -- The video clearly shows he has both feet in the air and lunging toward the forward, taking him down. 

Anyway, I promise not to post about this anymore. Anyone who doesn't see the penalty in this video is just not going to be convinced no matter what.

 

 

Edited December 14, 2022 by TokyoWanderer

[Constantine]

1 minute ago, TokyoWanderer said:

I don't want to be thick, but looking at the video I'm posting below, it is hard for me to understand how anyone can consider this a 50/50 play. Anyway, I promise not to post about this anymore.

 

 

Post to your heart's content, as long as you're not spamming.

IMO, when I watched it live, I didn't think it was a penalty. But I also can't disagree with the fact that it was given. It could be called, it didn't have to. I've seen similar situations and it was often a tip of a coin. Depends on the referee.

[kopsy101]

17 minutes ago, TokyoWanderer said:

I don't want to be thick, but looking at the video I'm posting below, it is hard for me to understand how anyone can consider this a 50/50 play.

"He is still on his feet" -- The video clearly shows he has both feet in the air and lunging toward the forward, taking him down. 

Anyway, I promise not to post about this anymore. Anyone who doesn't see the penalty in this video is just not going to be convinced no matter what.

 

 

 

Hadn't seen that, pretty damning

[Haguey]

2 hours ago, Coulthard's Jaw said:

Heh. Also, it was ITV who completely shat the bed after Germany went out wasn't it? Just really poor all round from them this World Cup.

They spent most of the full time analysis insisting Japan's goal had gone out of the pitch beforehand and demanding to see a replay

[VamPook]

Just noticed it was a foul throw before Messi's run

[Smallen]

5 minutes ago, Haguey said:

They spent most of the full time analysis insisting Japan's goal had gone out of the pitch beforehand and demanding to see a replay

****, I'd forgotten all about that bit . What a catastrophic shitfest that was. Souness was actually insane.

 

 

[Rob1981]

Graeme Souness moaning about the "conspiracy theories" that only he has started

Going to be one of the enduring memories of this WC for sure.

[GunmaN1905]

1 hour ago, TokyoWanderer said:

lunging toward the forward

Yeah, nice angle you pick thee from behind where it looks like the goalkeeper is one closing the distance, not the striker.

2 hours ago, Barry Cartman said:

Thats the basics of football, its the only same as a defender sliding in and the difference between a clean tackle and a foul can be the other player kicking the ball at their foot/leg so it isn't a foul, or them chipping it over their foot causing a foul 

It wasn't the basic of football until VAR started nitpicking with nonsense.

Since it was impossible to see slight touches in real time without VAR, it was always about if the forward can get to the ball and did the defender take him out.

The penalty in Argentina-Poland match was something unprecedented in history.

[Confused Clarity]

1 hour ago, Haguey said:

They spent most of the full time analysis insisting Japan's goal had gone out of the pitch beforehand and demanding to see a replay

 

1 hour ago, Smallen said:

****, I'd forgotten all about that bit . What a catastrophic shitfest that was. Souness was actually insane.

 

 

 

44 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

Graeme Souness moaning about the "conspiracy theories" that only he has started

Going to be one of the enduring memories of this WC for sure.

The best thing is, while he was ranting about "Why aren't FIFA showing anybody the evidence?", other broadcasters globally were all showing the evidence and official VAR videos to their audience. 

It was entirely a construct of ITV that they think their audience is too thick to be aware about.

It was our own equivalent of foreign Premier league players who moan about England to their press when they go home and dont expect us to find out.

[enigmatic]

1 hour ago, TokyoWanderer said:

I don't want to be thick, but looking at the video I'm posting below, it is hard for me to understand how anyone can consider this a 50/50 play.

"He is still on his feet" -- The video clearly shows he has both feet in the air and lunging toward the forward, taking him down. 

Anyway, I promise not to post about this anymore. Anyone who doesn't see the penalty in this video is just not going to be convinced no matter what.

 

 

Yeah. That's the one. Think if it's not given on the field VAR would call him back and show him that.

Sure, everyone agrees that Livakovic is trying to make himself big to make the save not to take down the oncoming player (that's why the card wasn't red), but he doesn't make a save and does prevent the opponent from reaching the ball for a tapin with a leg stretched out across the onrushing player (which isn't even close to playing the ball or necessary to be there to support his weight). That's always going to get given as a foul

 

4 hours ago, Coulthard's Jaw said:

I felt it was Neville going big on it and Keane/Wright almost couldn't be bothered having the argument.

Also, Pougatch is really bad and I feel like the people behind the scenes aren't great either?

Keane definitely sounded like he couldn't be arsed. Wrighty was the big surprise: guy was a striker FFS, should be biased the other way!

Did laugh when Neville compared it with his playing days. Mate, when you started tackling people by sticking your legs out and hoping for the best you retired a few weeks later!

 

31 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Yeah, nice angle you pick thee from behind where it looks like the goalkeeper is one closing the distance, not the striker.

It wasn't the basic of football until VAR started nitpicking with nonsense.

Since it was impossible to see slight touches in real time without VAR, it was always about if the forward can get to the ball and did the defender take him out.

The penalty in Argentina-Poland match was something unprecedented in history.

I mean, the goalkeeper clearly is closing the distance... he actually he moves so far across Alvarez's path he moves out the way of the ball being chipped past him! Striker also closes the distance but he's the one that plays the ball. Two players go in for a challenge which makes high speed collision inevitable and one gets to the ball cleanly and first, the other one nearly always gets penalised, especially if the other one has his leg stuck out in the opposite direction to the ball movement. Has always been that way, even more so before VAR started allowing refs to nitpick about whether the player that won the ball looked for the contact or not (Alvarez didn't)

 

[enigmatic]

5 hours ago, Smallen said:

some of ITV's punditry has been absolutely surreal. 

I'd expect better from Wright normally as well. 

tbf I think the tone was set on the first day when the Beeb  decided their half time take on the Ecuador disallowed goal was "here's FIFA's proof he was in an offside position, but nobody in the stadium spotted it in real time (and most of them didn't realise the defender on the line couldn't play him onside if he was the last man) so how dare they give it!"

Ironically there was an actual argument that the ref interpreted it completely wrongly (if the ball touched him in an offside position, it was because an opponent played it into him) , but they were too busy being angry that the officials didn't have the decency to call offsides based on whether the fans watching thought to pay attention to details like rules  

[VamPook]