England v USA
-
- Posts: 5642
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 pm
- Been Liked: 766 times
- Has Liked: 499 times
- Location: Devon
Re: England v USA
England second best all over the pitch with the yanks letting us off the hook, I thought 2-0 at the start so at least we did score one goal.
Re: England v USA
Only if the defender makes an attempt to play the ball. I'm not sure she did in this case.aggi wrote:The rules changed a year ago. Not a red card anymore.
-
- Posts: 9294
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:48 pm
- Been Liked: 4093 times
- Has Liked: 6568 times
- Location: Burnley
Re: England v USA
You mean I’ve been screaming my napper off at refs all this time, and I was wrong?aggi wrote:The rules changed a year ago. Not a red card anymore.
Not done that before...
Re: England v USA
In my opinion, the better ( looking) team won
-
- Posts: 8525
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:22 pm
- Been Liked: 2889 times
- Has Liked: 1763 times
Re: England v USA
england were naive and not sharp enough when it mattered, at least the usa team had the right idea of sticking it in the corners to run the clock down.
Good effort overall though to reach semi final, so well done to them.
Good effort overall though to reach semi final, so well done to them.
Re: England v USA
Ga nederland.
Ga van der donk.
Yes, OK, she plays for arsenal, but she's got better ball control than anyone on that pitch today.
Ga van der donk.
Yes, OK, she plays for arsenal, but she's got better ball control than anyone on that pitch today.
Re: England v USA
The defender wasn't making an attempt to do anything except get to the ball. The two players touched feet, both players were tripped by the collision. and it was deemed that the collision was accidental and was the defender's fault.Tall Paul wrote:Only if the defender makes an attempt to play the ball. I'm not sure she did in this case.
The red card is for when the defender is fouling with the intention of fouling; yellow is for when the foul would have been a red card offence if it hadn't been for the two facts: that it resulted in a penalty, and that the defender wasn't intending to foul.
-
- Posts: 1049
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 7:55 pm
- Been Liked: 315 times
- Has Liked: 1101 times
Re: England v USA
Clear and helpful from dsr there.
Personally, in real time, I thought it was definitely not a penalty.
I also thought that Jonathan Pearce was beyond crap. What’s that saying about an empty vessel making most noise?
The better team won - IMHO.
Personally, in real time, I thought it was definitely not a penalty.
I also thought that Jonathan Pearce was beyond crap. What’s that saying about an empty vessel making most noise?
The better team won - IMHO.
Re: England v USA
Nope.dsr wrote:The defender wasn't making an attempt to do anything except get to the ball. The two players touched feet, both players were tripped by the collision. and it was deemed that the collision was accidental and was the defender's fault.
The red card is for when the defender is fouling with the intention of fouling; yellow is for when the foul would have been a red card offence if it hadn't been for the two facts: that it resulted in a penalty, and that the defender wasn't intending to foul.
http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-gov ... misconduct" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.
-
- Posts: 3779
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:15 am
- Been Liked: 1829 times
- Has Liked: 2623 times
- Location: Ashington, Northumberland
Re: England v USA
A USA team managed by an English lady and whose Sports Scientist also is English and both think that, because of the prevalent attitude to Womens' football in the UK, they would have been nowhere near the position that they are now in.
For all those whinging about the commentary and the comments ---did you not know that there is a volume control on all TVs and monitors and it is a really simple procedure to use it, in fact, they have a 'Mute' button which makes it even easier to watch in comfort.
For all those whinging about the commentary and the comments ---did you not know that there is a volume control on all TVs and monitors and it is a really simple procedure to use it, in fact, they have a 'Mute' button which makes it even easier to watch in comfort.
-
- Posts: 7369
- Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 7:39 pm
- Been Liked: 2234 times
- Has Liked: 2132 times
Re: England v USA
Don't shoot the messenger...
- Attachments
-
- 20190702_231331.jpg (65.61 KiB) Viewed 1704 times
This user liked this post: The Enclosure
Re: England v USA
All the examples given before "etc." are for deliberate actions by the player. In cases like this one, where there is no malicious intent, the ref will usually if not always put the offence in the category of "attempt to play the ball" rather than "deliberate foul" because the law isn't clear.http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-gov ... misconduct
Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.
Actually, I don't see why it should be a foul by the defender anyway. Both players tried to put their feet in the same place, and both players fell over.
Who decides who has priority over that bit of grass?
Re: England v USA
Soon be proper football....the Championship kick off
Re: England v USA
Dreadful decision by somebody ( Neville ?) to give the penalty taking responsibility to our center half ( who looked utterly terrified ). Why oh why would one of the best finishers in Womans football be stood watching ? Bit like Spurs not using Kane !!! If England score the pen they win.
-
- Posts: 3779
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:15 am
- Been Liked: 1829 times
- Has Liked: 2623 times
- Location: Ashington, Northumberland
Re: England v USA
dsr --VAR decides --rubbish isn't it. Unfortunately, that is the way that the game is going and every contact will be a foul one way or another.dsr wrote:All the examples given before "etc." are for deliberate actions by the player. In cases like this one, where there is no malicious intent, the ref will usually if not always put the offence in the category of "attempt to play the ball" rather than "deliberate foul" because the law isn't clear.
Actually, I don't see why it should be a foul by the defender anyway. Both players tried to put their feet in the same place, and both players fell over.
Who decides who has priority over that bit of grass?
I honestly think that the officials would not have given anything in this case and I also believe that the England goal would have stood.
I really don't think that VAR is doing anything to help the onfield officials, in fact, I think that is is undermining their authority.
This user liked this post: Dark Cloud
-
- Posts: 3946
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:31 am
- Been Liked: 1049 times
- Has Liked: 723 times
Re: England v USA
Attacker was in front of goal, defender was behind attacker. Attacker shoots and defender accidentally collides with shooting leg, meaning she fails to strike the ball.dsr wrote:All the examples given before "etc." are for deliberate actions by the player. In cases like this one, where there is no malicious intent, the ref will usually if not always put the offence in the category of "attempt to play the ball" rather than "deliberate foul" because the law isn't clear.
Actually, I don't see why it should be a foul by the defender anyway. Both players tried to put their feet in the same place, and both players fell over.
Who decides who has priority over that bit of grass?
Weather she meant it or not and it was an attempt to play the ball she stopped England having a clear shot on goal. Can't understand how anyone can think it was a penalty. Just like if you trip someone in the middle of the pitch, doesn't matter if you mean to do it.
The comment about the red card was tongue in cheek by the way...
Re: England v USA
There's certainly no doubt that before VAR, that goal would have stood because the players were level, and all the pundits would have said the goal should stand because the players were level. They changed the rule years back to make "level" count as onside; before that "level" was offside. Now, if they want to specify in the laws that there is no longer any such thing as "level" for VAR, and that the laws for VAR games are different from ordinary games, then they should do so. But if they don't want to do so, then the players were still level under the existing law and the goal should have stood.Ashingtonclaret46 wrote:dsr --VAR decides --rubbish isn't it. Unfortunately, that is the way that the game is going and every contact will be a foul one way or another.
I honestly think that the officials would not have given anything in this case and I also believe that the England goal would have stood.
I really don't think that VAR is doing anything to help the onfield officials, in fact, I think that is is undermining their authority.
Ironically, the reason for the change re. "level" was to give forwards a better chance and th encourage goals. It seems that now they have VAR, they are going to use it to gleefully go back to the old rules and give the forwards less chance and to disallow more goals. Though presumably they will use the contact rule to give a lot more penalties to make up for it.
And as for a five minute delay to establish a "clear and obvious error" !!! There are some idiots running the game. They should have looked at both incidents twice, said "looks OK to me", and got on with it.
I don't know how long the offside took, but there was 4 minutes 56 seconds between the foul and the penalty. 7 minutes total injury time - she wasn't adding much on for subs or injuries.
Re: England v USA
Attacker shoots and defender accidentally collides with shooting leg. Or alternatively, defender runs towards the ball and attacker accidentally collides with standing leg. Why is the accidental clash of legs deemed to be the fault of the defender? There's too much of this "two players touched, one fell over, it's a foul by the other". If A touching B is a foul, then B touching A is a foul.Claretmatt4 wrote:Attacker was in front of goal, defender was behind attacker. Attacker shoots and defender accidentally collides with shooting leg, meaning she fails to strike the ball.
Weather she meant it or not and it was an attempt to play the ball she stopped England having a clear shot on goal. Can't understand how anyone can think it was a penalty. Just like if you trip someone in the middle of the pitch, doesn't matter if you mean to do it.
The comment about the red card was tongue in cheek by the way...
(I think you have missed out a "not" a penalty.)
-
- Posts: 3779
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:15 am
- Been Liked: 1829 times
- Has Liked: 2623 times
- Location: Ashington, Northumberland
Re: England v USA
dsr --I agree wholeheartedly with what you say, however, those running the game and the modern fan want everything to be 100% ---why? --I don't know.
All I will say is that, in their quest for perfection ---or is it political correctness? ---- they are ruining what was once a beautiful game, however, they and the media will be more than happy.
All I will say is that, in their quest for perfection ---or is it political correctness? ---- they are ruining what was once a beautiful game, however, they and the media will be more than happy.
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: England v USA
Euro's are a great opportunity to finally lift silverware,Dutch,Germans and the French will be England's biggest threat,but home advantage is huge.evensteadiereddie wrote:A lot of work to do on passing and movement but an entertaining and pretty successful campaign. They'll win the Euros.
What's annoying is i didn't think the Yanks were that special tonight(particularly 2nd half) and had England been more clinical with their finishing a final beckoned.
Baffled by a centre-back taking the penalty,if Ellen White didn't want the responsibility,Lucy Bronze is arguably England's best striker of a ball.
That miss and the marginal VAR call was all that separated the sides,another one that got away.
-
- Posts: 1051
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:48 am
- Been Liked: 637 times
- Has Liked: 441 times
- Location: London
Re: England v USA
Lot of respect from me for dsr on this thread. Absolutely nailed it. If an error is clear and obvious then it should take less than 30 seconds to establish. Five mins is a joke.
-
- Posts: 10898
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5553 times
- Has Liked: 208 times
Re: England v USA
I think the pundits really let themselves down after the game. The game is fighting to gain respect and for the players to be respected as equals and professionals but when one misses a penalty they started with the “she was so brave to step up”.
It really came across as defending her because she’s just a poor, poor woman trying so hard.
It really came across as defending her because she’s just a poor, poor woman trying so hard.
-
- Posts: 3213
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:40 pm
- Been Liked: 892 times
- Has Liked: 1169 times
- Location: Proudsville
Re: England v USA
I have to say I don't agree with that.
There's been tons of times where a male footballer has had the same said about him.
There's been tons of times where a male footballer has had the same said about him.
-
- Posts: 17242
- Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 1:57 pm
- Been Liked: 6478 times
- Has Liked: 2908 times
- Location: Fife
Re: England v USA
Neville was being advised how to manage an England side by Roy Hodgson,didn't he have Harry Kane taking corners at one tournament .....soon as we got the penalty(dodgy) we were going to miss it,it's the English way.FCBurnley wrote:Dreadful decision by somebody ( Neville ?) to give the penalty taking responsibility to our center half ( who looked utterly terrified ). Why oh why would one of the best finishers in Womans football be stood watching ? Bit like Spurs not using Kane !!! If England score the pen they win.
-
- Posts: 10156
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
- Been Liked: 4183 times
- Has Liked: 57 times
Re: England v USA
Men against boys
-
- Posts: 638
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:22 am
- Been Liked: 156 times
- Has Liked: 131 times
Re: England v USA
Were you a bit pished last night or was something in the sausages?Sausage wrote:Lot of respect from me for dsr on this thread.
Re: England v USA
That's pretty much the default from ex-pros, whether they are talking about men or women.TheFamilyCat wrote:I think the pundits really let themselves down after the game. The game is fighting to gain respect and for the players to be respected as equals and professionals but when one misses a penalty they started with the “she was so brave to step up”.
It really came across as defending her because she’s just a poor, poor woman trying so hard.
Re: England v USA
Defenders often make good penalty takers.tiger76 wrote:Baffled by a centre-back taking the penalty
Graham Alexander!
-
- Posts: 10898
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5553 times
- Has Liked: 208 times
Re: England v USA
Maybe in a shoot-out that has gone to sudden death and somebody has had to step up but I don’t agree when it is a penalty in normal time.aggi wrote:That's pretty much the default from ex-pros, whether they are talking about men or women.
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: England v USA
True but they are regular penalty takers,just found it strange with the amount of experience and technical skill England had available,that the CB stepped up,i know she's the skipper,but that penalty completely lacked conviction.Spijed wrote:Defenders often make good penalty takers.
Graham Alexander!
-
- Posts: 11497
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:33 pm
- Been Liked: 3181 times
- Has Liked: 1864 times
- Contact:
Re: England v USA
tiger76 wrote:True but they are regular penalty takers,just found it strange with the amount of experience and technical skill England had available,that the CB stepped up,i know she's the skipper,but that penalty completely lacked conviction.
Can't remember who it was now, but I recall a forward player commenting that the reason some strikers don't take penalties is because they aren't use to shooting with a "dead ball"
-
- Posts: 3779
- Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:15 am
- Been Liked: 1829 times
- Has Liked: 2623 times
- Location: Ashington, Northumberland
Re: England v USA
Could well be true.wilks_bfc wrote:Can't remember who it was now, but I recall a forward player commenting that the reason some strikers don't take penalties is because they aren't use to shooting with a "dead ball"
It had obviously been discussed after Nikita Parris had missed two penalties in thre preceding rounds. They had obviously decided that Steph Houghton would step up and do the job, unfortunately, she scuffed it and the rest is history.
Re: England v USA
Which is why goalkeepers (if they can keep the ball down) should be very good at them. They're used to kicking a dead ball very hard. (Burnley keepers especially! )wilks_bfc wrote:Can't remember who it was now, but I recall a forward player commenting that the reason some strikers don't take penalties is because they aren't use to shooting with a "dead ball"
Re: England v USA
Defenders aren’t use to shooting at allwilks_bfc wrote:Can't remember who it was now, but I recall a forward player commenting that the reason some strikers don't take penalties is because they aren't use to shooting with a "dead ball"
-
- Posts: 19799
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
- Been Liked: 5483 times
- Has Liked: 2540 times
- Location: Burnley, Lancs
Re: England v USA
Apparently English football fans, snowflakes that they are, got upset over a USA player celebration.
-
- Posts: 5084
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 11:15 am
- Been Liked: 1180 times
- Has Liked: 635 times
- Location: Tibet
Re: England v USA
Imploding Turtle wrote:Apparently English football fans, snowflakes that they are, got upset over a USA player celebration.
Hummmm bunch of pussies those Lionesses
-
- Posts: 2273
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:55 pm
- Been Liked: 507 times
- Has Liked: 1036 times
Re: England v USA
The girl obviously knocks them in for fun in training. Don’t suppose ‘nerves’ had anything to do with scuffing the shot. Only seen the slowmo once, in a pub, but it seemed to bounce at least once taking all the speed off it.
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: England v USA
I found it amusing and an original celebration,about time some humour was introduced into the game.Imploding Turtle wrote:Apparently English football fans, snowflakes that they are, got upset over a USA player celebration.
And we English are famed tea drinkers after all.
-
- Posts: 10309
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
- Been Liked: 3337 times
- Has Liked: 1954 times
Re: England v USA
I’ve heard England had a Concentration Camp celebration lined up in retaliation had we equalised.
-
- Posts: 4452
- Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:55 pm
- Been Liked: 1152 times
- Has Liked: 182 times
Re: England v USA
It must be remembered though that most Americans still think “ f*** your queen” is some sort of knife through the heart insult . They still see the brits as red buses/red phone box/black cab tea drinkers who speak either the queens English or mockney cockney.