Southampton away Sunday 24th 2pm

[vlahka]

It looks suspiciously like a foul:

https://imgur.com/a/Kyjkpjs

The more I watch this the more angry it makes me that it was firstly absolutely ignored and secondly nobody brought it up while the game was on. Something like that is pretty much ref trying to dictate the outcome of the match. And VAR not bothering to do a check when its their job. Even more disgustingly is you wont see this mentioned in the press either. Every ones just content to let blatant cheating by officials slide. Its not even a debatable 50/50 position! Picture that being Konate pulling someone back. The indignation everywhere would be insane.

[Cerbie]

The more I watch this the more angry it makes me that it was firstly absolutely ignored and secondly nobody brought it up while the game was on. Something like that is pretty much ref trying to dictate the outcome of the match. And VAR not bothering to do a check when its their job. Even more disgustingly is you wont see this mentioned in the press either. Every ones just content to let blatant cheating by officials slide. Its not even a debatable 50/50 position! Picture that being Konate pulling someone back. The indignation everywhere would be insane.

Oliver on VAR, standard officiating.

[vlahka]

When I saw oliver on screen during the first penalty call I knew 100% he was going to give it.

[spud_gun]

When I saw oliver on screen during the first penalty call I knew 100% he was going to give it.

It was 100% a penalty though?

[Jas]

It was 100% a penalty though?

The Southampton one?? I'm not so sure, It was a very tight call but I thought the initial contact was defo outside the box.

[Cerbie]

It was 100% a penalty though?

The Robbo challenge for their one, or the hand ball for ours?

Robbo was clumsy and it’s a foul, but the fact Robbo’s left foot is just touching the line means the contact had to have been outside the box. I don’t know the precise law about contact vs the position of a foot of the defender making the challenge.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spud_gun]

His foots touching the line therefore it's a penalty

[Cerbie]

His foots touching the line therefore it's a penalty

So the defenders foot is the deciding factor not the point of contact? Fair enough, it’s a pen if that’s the case.

[Doc_Piptorious]

The Robbo challenge for their one, or the hand ball for ours?

Robbo was clumsy and it’s a foul, but the fact Robbo’s left foot is just touching the line means the contact had to have been outside the box. I don’t know the precise law about contact vs the position of a foot of the defender making the challenge.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The attacking player has to be fouled inside the box afaik. The contact has to take place inside the box.

Does not matter if the player falls into the box after contact is made outside of it. The foul is only where contact was made.


EDIT: Just saw the new rule and a foot on the line is counted as being inside the box even if the attacking player is not inside the box so the attacking player can in fact be outside the box and still get a penalty now. The old rule made far more sense tbh.

The 2024/2025 Premier League season will kickoff with new updates, including those for encroachment during penalty kicks. When the ball is kicked, if a player has a foot on the penalty area line, which includes the 'arc', they are encroaching

[Cerbie]

The attacking player has to be fouled inside the box afaik. The contact has to take place inside the box.

Does not matter if the player falls into the box after contact is made outside of it. The foul is only where contact was made.

That was my understanding up to now, but I have been shown to be clueless on the letter of the law previously on here, so just wanting clarification.

[spud_gun]

Which of the above photos is showing the point of contact?

[Doc_Piptorious]

That was my understanding up to now, but I have been shown to be clueless on the letter of the law previously on here, so just wanting clarification.

I edited my post after reading there was a new rule with regards to penalties that came in this season


Seems contact can occur outside the box and it can still be deemed a penalty if the defending player is touching the line when he makes contact with the ball or player. Falls under encroachment.

[Cerbie]

I edited my post after reading there was a new rule with regards to penalties that came in this season


Seems contact can occur outside the box and it can still be deemed a penalty if the defending player is touching the line when he makes contact with the ball or player. Falls under encroachment.

Thanks for that. Seems we are falling fouls of new rules every season. Ho, hum 3pts, we move on.

[chadrtc]

The attacking player has to be fouled inside the box afaik. The contact has to take place inside the box.

Does not matter if the player falls into the box after contact is made outside of it. The foul is only where contact was made.


EDIT: Just saw the new rule and a foot on the line is counted as being inside the box even if the attacking player is not inside the box so the attacking player can in fact be outside the box and still get a penalty now. The old rule made far more sense tbh.

That’s the encroachment rule for when a penalty is being taken, not for the challenge itself.

[Scratch]

Yeah, i don't buy the "Robertson was touching the line when contact was made part", that doesn't come into it. What VAR couldn't tell is whether or not the S'ton players foot was touching the line at the point of contact, cos the two camera angles that VAR saw showed no evidence either way. The side on shot, the attackers foot was blocked by Robertson's leg, and from the angle behind the goal it looked like maybe the toe of the attackers boot was on the line, but those angles always deceive so there wasn't enough to overturn the decision.

I don't think any of the stills above show the actual point of contact that VAR were shown, the front on angle VAR saw had the attackers foot planted on the ground and the toe of his boot in the vicinity of the line.