No he isnt?He's already falling over before the contact, well diving before the contact.
No he isnt?He's already falling over before the contact, well diving before the contact.
Longstaff?No he isnt?
Is this just your way of coping with getting beat by us again or are you just trying to distract us all from how bad Newcastle are right now?This is glorious. We had walking commentary on penalty decisions from Liverpool fans all season on penalties and which shouldn’t be given diving, not enough contact. Yapping about refs despite the fact that Liverpool has been awarded some of the softest penalties you ever did see.
Ole Dom loves a dive. I’m half expecting equations showing player speed, direction of travel and point of contact with a blade of grass which made the player throw himself to the ground in front of an open net
I will be extremely disappointed if I don’t see a white board soon showing these equations.
Is the last sentence self reflection as you're admitting to being a hypocrite having just attacked others for, in your opinion, being hypocritical.Let’s face it everyone is just as hypocritical as each other. Despite some thinking they sit on a pedestal.
At lest I can see my faultsIs the last sentence self reflection as you're admitting to being a hypocrite having just attacked others for, in your opinion, being hypocritical.
They did up the amount of “physical contact aloud in tackle before it’s called a foul” probably hasn’t helpedThe standard of fouling these days is absolutely appalling, or should I say what constitutes a foul.
It's so inconsistent it's unbelievable.
Gary Neville in his prime would probably concede a penalty or two every game with the current "Any contact and hitting the ground" = A penalty
The number of steps should be irrelevant. If a player is fouled, the ref should blow as soon as there is no advantage, regardless of whether that player goes down or not. Had Jota been unable to reach the ball due to the foul, the ref would have blown. Jota would have been incentivised to stay on his feet and try to play on, in the knowlege that play could then have been pulled back for the foul had he been unable to get a shot off.
You're admitting that there was a foul, so I can't understand why you think it shouldn't be a penalty. At the very least, once there is a foul the attacker should have the option of playing on or taking the foul. By falling over, Jota clearly chose the latter. There should be a more elegant way of doing this, however, such as refs being willing to give fouls even where a player does not go down.
So is your position that a foul has to be enough to take a player off his feet? Because that's not how the game has been played for years now.You are trying to change the way the game is played, that isn't how it works, even if I might agree with you. You can't not go down and then dive and not call it a dive.
seems to be that if a player doesnt go down straight away then its a dive. Utterly irrelevant that a foul can unbalance a player so he goes down half a second later, or someone takes another step, thats a dive in those circumstances according to KlinckSo is your position that a foul has to be enough to take a player off his feet? Because that's not how the game has been played for years now.
At the end of the day a foul is if a player is impeded. Was Jota impeded?You are trying to change the way the game is played, that isn't how it works, even if I might agree with you. You can't not go down and then dive and not call it a dive.
At the end of the day a foul is if a player is impeded. Was Jota impeded?
A freelick or in this case a penalty is up to the referee if he/she deems it to be careless, reckless or using excessive force.Thats not what constitutes a foul otherwise every contact in the box is a penalty. Defender grapples with you at all, hes impeding you. He holds your shirt at all, hes impeding you. There has to be some level of understanding that its a contact sport and not every contact is a penalty and yet every contact does impede you....
Liverpool innitI'm a Villa fan and it amazes me this 'foul' in particular is garnering such attention. In the same week we took all 3 points from a penalty that came from a dive almost as obvious as Jotas. That game was both more contentious and more poorly refereed then the Liverpool game. I'd be disgusted if I was a Burnley fan.
Hence why these cheaters will get away with it as it's subjective, anyone that isn't a Liverpool fan can see that's a clear dive all day long.
So is your position that a foul has to be enough to take a player off his feet? Because that's not how the game has been played for years now.