Greenlizard0 Premier League Football Thread ** spoilers ** [30/31 Dec 23 1/2 Jan 24]

Status
Not open for further replies.
fez said:
Because there was no impact to anything he was doing. He quite literally took another step and then threw himself to the floor unconvincingly. I have played sport my entire life and watched a lot of football. When there is enough contact to impact a player its pretty clear that the impact has done something. Yes players are very good at exaggerating or initiating contact at times but there are also ridiculously obvious dives and this was one of them. You can bring down the likes of Haaland with very little contact if you do it right but you will see what effect that "little" contact has because it will knock them off balance or clip their heels together. There was none of that here. He felt the contact and his brain processed it so slowly that by the time he was going down it was comical.
Click to expand...

I don't think we're disagreeing on the extent to which it "looks" like Jota is unaffected.. as I agree.. it "looks" minimal contact, and then Jota goes down after another step or two..

I'm saying no-one on this forum can "know" the extent to which Jota was effected.. there was definitely contact.. and I think that's all we can "know" about the situation.

I can see the contact, and yes I "think" it's not enough to go down like he does. So it's a very soft penalty in my eyes.. but everyone saying they "know" the effect the minimal contact had is just wrong imo..
 
omnomnom said:
Whats a dive? Genuine question. If its a case of a player has gone down easily i.e the contact isnt enough then there is 30 "dives" a game.
Click to expand...

A dive is when there is no contact or when there is contact but the player stays on their feet but throws themselves to the floor after because they want the advantage they think they aren't getting/going to get.
 
C Kent said:
what classifies a dive in your opinion? You've said it was a penalty at point of contact, if jota takes the shot and misses, should play be called back? Why does a player *have* to go down to get a foul and a penalty?
Click to expand...

I just said in the post above what I class as a dive. If he'd gone down at the contact it would have been a pen but he didn't, he made a choice to go down later and that is a dive.

The other part is about advantage and that is a different question.
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
I just said in the post above what I class as a dive. If he'd gone down at the contact it would have been a pen but he didn't, he made a choice to go down later and that is a dive.

The other part is about advantage and that is a different question.
Click to expand...
Went down later, so what sort of time frame? Half a second? a second? A couple of seconds? I'll ask again, if there's a foul, as in the Jota example why does the attacker have to stay on his feet given referees don't give the foul if there is no 'advantage' gained.
 
Can't believe the amount of saltiness here...

The second pen was never a pen.

Would it have changed the result? No.

Liverpool were far too good and won the 3 points.

Nothing more to it.
 
Last edited:
C Kent said:
Went down later, so what sort of time frame? Half a second? a second? A couple of seconds? I'll ask again, if there's a foul, as in the Jota example why does the attacker have to stay on his feet given referees don't give the foul if there is no 'advantage' gained.
Click to expand...

Players choose not to go down after contact all the time. If they then decide to throw themselves to the floor a couple of steps later then its a dive. They had the chance to go down at contact and chose not to, that is on them. Whether there should be an advantage if they carry on and miss or a defender gets back and blocks it is another question and irrelevant to this. He didn't go down, he then changed his mind and threw himself to the floor, that is a dive.
 
Unfortunately most professional players do it nowadays, disappointing but the refs and VAR keep giving them so it will continue. Like I said earlier, Jota could have easily scored and should have but he chose not to. Do you think he'll look back at the footage and think "next time I'll make the morally right decision and stay on my feet" or will he just think he provided his team with a penalty and eventual goal?
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
Players choose not to go down after contact all the time. If they then decide to throw themselves to the floor a couple of steps later then its a dive. They had the chance to go down at contact and chose not to, that is on them. Whether there should be an advantage if they carry on and miss or a defender gets back and blocks it is another question and irrelevant to this. He didn't go down, he then changed his mind and threw himself to the floor, that is a dive.
Click to expand...
Again he went down when his standing foot that had been interfered with hit the ground on his next step, the keeper has admitted he made contact. Try running past someone at full pelt and have your standing foot 'touched', see how you get on. It's a foul, ref on field blew for a pen, var agreed.
 
Last edited:
woppy101 said:
Having slept on the game, Liverpool should have been out of sight and not needed 2 penalties to beat us, but those 2 penalties are perfect examples of penalties that are only given at anfield to the home team, the foul on Longstaff wasn’t even checked and was as much of a penalty as the other 2.
Click to expand...
He's already falling over before the contact, well diving before the contact.
 
The Jota one isnt a dive, he plants one foot and then the next foot that was clipped by the keeper which results in the fall. Pretty clear really and if you've ever been clipped while running at speed you will know. When you run both feet dont hit the ground together, :cry: all these people saying he took two steps before falling, well he did, just with different feet. Unlike the the Newcastle one when he's already falling over before the contact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom