• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

2014 FIFA World Cup |OT5| Que Jara, Jara. Whatever Will Be, Will Be.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The yellow card/red card dichotomy is kinda ridiculous in soccer.

Yellow - basically no penalty at all outside of a free kick.

Red - severe penalty, sent off for remainder of game.

And the problem is that there is a very fine line between the two. Makes no sense, maybe they should increase the penalty for a yellow, maybe off for 10 minutes. Save reds for really egregious shit.

That's what rugby does, definitely feel like it would be a welcome change in soccer. Rugby is stop clock though.
 
The yellow card/red card dichotomy is kinda ridiculous in soccer.

Yellow - basically no penalty at all outside of a free kick.

Red - severe penalty, sent off for remainder of game.

And the problem is that there is a very fine line between the two. Makes no sense, maybe they should increase the penalty for a yellow, maybe off for 10 minutes. Save reds for really egregious shit.

well, you are wrong about the penalty of a yellow card, however, I kinda like the bolded idea.
 
The yellow card/red card dichotomy is kinda ridiculous in soccer.

Yellow - basically no penalty at all outside of a free kick.

Red - severe penalty, sent off for remainder of game.

And the problem is that there is a very fine line between the two. Makes no sense, maybe they should increase the penalty for a yellow, maybe off for 10 minutes. Save reds for really egregious shit.

What... Having a yellow impacts the way you are able to play the rest of the match quite a bit... and if you collect enough yellows through several matches you will get a suspension anyway. Off for 10 minutes? Fuck no.
 
You're taught from the juniors that you don't go studs high with a raised foot like that into any challenge. If you see guy a sliding, you either stop, go in sliding aswell or jump. You raise your foot and expose your studs, even if it is towards the ball and not the opponent's legs, you're gone.

He WAS trying to stop. He tried to put a stop on the ball at the same time. He wasn't playing through the slide. The red was bull.
 
No you really don't and I'm pretty sure that has already been explained to you once today? Or was that someone else bringing up the exact same shitty point? We can all agree that referee made a mistake in the Uruguay match. That was as clear a red as they come, just after biting people at least. It's not a standard to compare other challenges to.

So why do referees each year at courses watch different situations and tackles with an answer from the national footbal federation how to punish a player in those tackles? So that referees learn which tackles are red, yellow just a telling off or nothing.
 
The yellow card/red card dichotomy is kinda ridiculous in soccer.

Yellow - basically no penalty at all outside of a free kick.

Red - severe penalty, sent off for remainder of game.

And the problem is that there is a very fine line between the two. Makes no sense, maybe they should increase the penalty for a yellow, maybe off for 10 minutes. Save reds for really egregious shit.

This really isn't true AT ALL. Yes, refs make errors all the time, but on a replay red vs yellow is almost always obvious. If you do something very dangerous intentionally or you stop a chance to score it's a red. In all other cases it's yellow. No trick there...
 
having only seen that play from the slow motion, was it possible he was putting his foot on the ball to roll it back to avoid the sliding French player....who then kicked the ball from under him causing the stamp?
 
Looks to me like the Ecuador player was trying to stop the ball and avoid the slide but the slide took his foot off the ball. Running like that, there's no way to avoid stepping on the defender's leg when he slides in like that. Had his foot been parallel to the ground, he would have still raked his studs across the defender's leg. It was completely unintentional and totally initiated by the defender's aggressive play.

A ref needs to be smarter than that.

Go in studs up like that is a red. That's it.

He WAS trying to stop. He tried to put a stop on the ball at the same time. He wasn't playing through the slide. The red was bull.

What he tried or didn't try to do doesn't matter. Fact is he went in studs up and didn't manage to stop even if he tried.
 
So if somebody intentionally breaks the leg, but touches a ball on the way there it's a yellow? I don't think there's a rule that specific. You might as well post a source.
I'm not even remotely trying to say this. The rules are:

If a player hits his opponent before the ball, that's a direct freekick.

We also differentiate between going for the ball and having no chance at the ball/going for the opponent.
 
So that was a red

And this was a yellow

ImaginativeMeekChital.gif


smh

Different refs. Yes it was red. No, it wasn't given. It's like the 4th time you bring this shit up.

LOL, let it the fuck go already.
 
So why do referees each year at courses watch different situations and tackles with an answer from the national footbal federation how to punish a player in those tackles? So that referees learn which tackles are red, yellow just a telling off or nothing.

It's not just a matter of learning. Refs don't have the option to watch slow-mo replays in every angle when they have to take an immediate decision.
 
2 consecutive yellows and you miss a match

Some competitions have 5 yellows and you are out for a match. A blue card (used in indoor football) might be welcomed but it would need a "ref board" or something. I don't think the 4th ref could handle that
 
So why do referees each year at courses watch different situations and tackles with an answer from the national footbal federation how to punish a player in those tackles? So that referees learn which tackles are red, yellow just a telling off or nothing.

Jesus christ.

How do you not get this.

The ref might not have seen the tackle properly... or he might just have been a terrible referee. Stop comparing every red card to the Uruguay one, cause that's a bad road to go down... We might as well not send anyone off unless they are throwing punches around then. This debate is hopeless.
 
He WAS trying to stop. He tried to put a stop on the ball at the same time. He wasn't playing through the slide. The red was bull.

He should have tried to stop the ball without showing his studs, with a side foot maybe. He saw the other player sliding in, you dont raise your studs in a situation like that. It's dangerous, regardless of his intentions.
 
Yup. And for people saying Valencia couldn't have avoided it because the French player went into the tackle too; he could, by not raising his studs like that in the first place. It's a red.
Yep. He could have pulled his leg after slipping over the ball, but he didn't.
 
So why do referees each year at courses watch different situations and tackles with an answer from the national footbal federation how to punish a player in those tackles? So that referees learn which tackles are red, yellow just a telling off or nothing.

What exactly are you trying to argue here?
 
I'm not even remotely trying to say this. The rules are:

If a player hits his opponent before the ball, that's a direct freekick.

We also differentiate between going for the ball and having no chance at the ball/going for the opponent.

Those are the rules in your book. Not the rules of the game. Sorry bud
 
Doesn't matter if it's intentional or not, the rule is if it's a dangerous play. That's the discussion, not what he tried to do.
Bad wording on my side. I mean, it's the French player who put his leg between Valencia and the ball. It wasn't a violent behavior for sure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom