-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Actually thinking about it ... it's a shit ruleIt was tight (if only we had VAR!), but the encroachment definitely occurred before Son stopped. Nothing against the rule in principle, but they need to find a way to make sure refs' interpretations are consistent.
It's just open to this total misinterpretation
Why not just have no rules against what the kicker can do ?
One step ... two step ... feint .. can feint here can't feint there .... always a recipe for disaster
If VAR continues in this fashion refs will be using it for every single throw in within 2 years. Takes the pressure off them to the point where there might aswell just be a robot with a whistle on the pitch, it will absolutely ruin football
Son's pen goal should have stood.
There is no feint when the player breaks his run when he is over a yard away or even a step away from the ball. Ronaldo and co do it every day.
It is feint when the player runs and stops by the ball spot watches the goalie dive to one side and then he slides the ball to the other.
The man in black was an i---t full stop. He cost us the first half, it could have been more costly.
There is no feint when the player breaks his run when he is over a yard away or even a step away from the ball. Ronaldo and co do it every day.
It is feint when the player runs and stops by the ball spot watches the goalie dive to one side and then he slides the ball to the other.
The man in black was an i---t full stop. He cost us the first half, it could have been more costly.
Last edited:
The advantage gained from feinting isn't always in the players favour, by doing this they slow their run, have less power in their shot and might have to change where they place the ball. It's no different to a keeper making movements to one side just before the player strikes the ball. The keeper is trying to force them a particular way or put them off, by doing this the keeper reduces the distance they can dive and the spring in their legs. What keepers can't do is come off the line to narrow the angle before the ball is kicked.
IMHO the ref fecked up last night. Llorente did pull the guys shirt but the player pulled his first so we should have had a penalty. Original goal should have stood as it was 50/50. The ref liked calling VAR so he should have checked on the pen, if he had it would have been retaken for the first offence (encroachment). He could have had a word in Son's ear saying it's unsporting to feint. It's no difference to refs warning players about calming down or the next challenge will be a card. The ref is there to advise, not just rule.
VAR spoilt the game and will if it is used regularly, truth is very few sequence of events are fault free. There will always be something minor to rule out a goal, you just have to go back far enough and it will be spotted.
For me goal line technology is all that's needed, the rest, some you win, some you lose. If all the controversy goes from the game so will half the fans as it's what fuels the debates.
Deep down I think the ref was trying to show how shit it is if it's used all the time. Might have done us all a favour by proving it's unpopular.
IMHO the ref fecked up last night. Llorente did pull the guys shirt but the player pulled his first so we should have had a penalty. Original goal should have stood as it was 50/50. The ref liked calling VAR so he should have checked on the pen, if he had it would have been retaken for the first offence (encroachment). He could have had a word in Son's ear saying it's unsporting to feint. It's no difference to refs warning players about calming down or the next challenge will be a card. The ref is there to advise, not just rule.
VAR spoilt the game and will if it is used regularly, truth is very few sequence of events are fault free. There will always be something minor to rule out a goal, you just have to go back far enough and it will be spotted.
For me goal line technology is all that's needed, the rest, some you win, some you lose. If all the controversy goes from the game so will half the fans as it's what fuels the debates.
Deep down I think the ref was trying to show how shit it is if it's used all the time. Might have done us all a favour by proving it's unpopular.
No replays from now on.
Ahhhh so every other decision was poor...funny because you was sucking off VAR the other week when I slated it in the WBA Liverpool game.
I was at the game and for most of the time didn't have a clue what was going on. All I knew was that everytime we scored didn't know whether to celebrate or what. Takes the fun out of it.
Essentially turns the ref into a puppet, especially as didn't even go over to review the decisions (although would probably still be playing at midnight with that)
Agree - all that is needed is goal line technology.
Essentially turns the ref into a puppet, especially as didn't even go over to review the decisions (although would probably still be playing at midnight with that)
Agree - all that is needed is goal line technology.
If VAR is used to decide every contentious decision its a no goer. If it pops up maybe 10 times a season (stuff like Maradona hand balls, Jan being offside in his own half!) then I'm ok with it.
Because I can foresee things you can't with your fanboy vision?How about GTFO?
So what would constitute a “legal feint” then?
In fact, what is a “feint”?
The rule isn’t at all clear because it allows the ref to determine what is a legal or illegal feint. And that will vary from ref to ref or VAR to VAR.
And during a penalty, it’s a very important, potentially game changing moment, which can see a player like Sonny booked for unsporting conduct! Sonny!!??!!
It’s an interesting discussion.
(If you’re a boring cunt like me)
Agree 100%
Had he started his run at the point he 'paused' (so a very short run up if you get my drift) that would have been allowed...
So why not this one?
In effect, he started to run, stopped well short of the ball (far enough NOT to be able to reach it from there) and merely took a mini run up and scored...
I genuinely don't see where the ambiguity has come from... unless you're not allowed to break your stride at ALL any more in the run up??
Did I miss the meeting where the word idiot was re-defined as swearing?
Either that or you're VERY polite!!
What u wittering on about now, you div?
You think predicting a few goals against a team bottom of Div 1 makes you clairvoyant or something?
Stick with spelling 101... Blatantly more your level since half your posts are barely intelligible.
Last edited:
mission creep
noun
Mission creep is the expansion of a project or mission beyond its original goals, often after initial successes.
i really don't think there is the ambiguity, those arguing against it are only doing so to try and justify the stupid decision (or using the old pre 2000 rules). The rule is clear that its only illegal at the end of your run up, there is plenty of resource confirming what the rule means in practise, the ref was just a plonker and now we are trying to work out what he saw so twisting the ruling.
all in my opinion.
Oh I agree don’t worry about that. Weird bunch when they get salty over a ref making correct decisions and display that butthurt weeks later.
What has Klopp done? 3 years on and he can’t fix the defence, midfield or goalie. Still leak goals like a sieve and are useless in cup finals. Wish they drew Juve, they wouldn’t have got a draw in Turin.