Jump to content

Confederations Cup 2013 - Official fs


Recommended Posts

Presumably his reasoning was that the foul was given for the two-footed tackle, not for denying a goal-scoring opportunity (since the tackle was clean).

Not sure that should be a penalty though. Indirect free-kick in the box? Anyone?

Penalty, and he's still denying a clear scoring opportunity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably his reasoning was that the foul was given for the two-footed tackle, not for denying a goal-scoring opportunity (since the tackle was clean).

Not sure that should be a penalty though. Indirect free-kick in the box? Anyone?

I think it's simpler than that.

He mistakenly thought it was a penalty, but shat it with the card.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably his reasoning was that the foul was given for the two-footed tackle, not for denying a goal-scoring opportunity (since the tackle was clean).

Not sure that should be a penalty though. Indirect free-kick in the box? Anyone?

Two footed tackles constitute dangerous play do they not? Should have been red.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely a two-footed tackle would be down as dangerous play and also a red card offense?

Thinking about it, it's got to be his only reasoning for giving the foul.

I believe it is a judgement call on the part of the ref. Depends on how dangerous.

And yeah, consulting the laws of the game, apparently dangerous play should be an indirect free-kick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...