• 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...

    Get involved!

Player Mathys Tel

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Herclueless said:
I mentioned that before, but that was "different" too. Apparently nobody ever, EVER, uses scissor kicks to clear the ball in defence. Apart from when they do, and then it's different...

Worth remembering that Ampadu's head was nowhere near Tel's foot either until he sprinted in and put it there!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I did think at the time there was a chance the ref may dismiss the claims because of that.
When Tel started his motion of the overhead kick ampadus was not near Tel, he Steam trained into his foot and the ball

2605142031530096.jpg


At this point of time he's started his motion of the bicycle, his eye is on the ball.
 
Last edited:
Kaz Hirai said:
I did think at the time there was a chance the ref may dismiss the claims because of that.
When Tel started his motion of the overhead kick ampadus was not near Tel, he Steam trained into his foot and the ball

2605142031530096.jpg


At this point of time his started his motion of the bicycle, his eye is on the ball.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah. That was my feeling watching it in the moment also. I actually don't think it's as clear cut as many have said for precisely those reasons ... Tel not looking at Amp, and then Amp launching his nut at Tel's foot.

There is presumably a point at which such a coming together would NOT be a penalty, or do people think that irrespective of how avoidable (on the part of the forward) the collision was, and therefore how "bought" it is, the high feet always mean a pen?
 
manmountainbutters said:
Yeah. That was my feeling watching it in the moment also. I actually don't think it's as clear cut as many have said for precisely those reasons ... Tel not looking at Amp, and then Amp launching his nut at Tel's foot.

There is presumably a point at which such a coming together would NOT be a penalty, or do people think that irrespective of how avoidable (on the part of the forward) the collision was, and therefore how "bought" it is, the high feet always mean a pen?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Not if you play for Liverpool and do it at Anfield against Spurs...


View: https://youtu.be/ZEXrJvimAZE?si=MqmSpVtOEyIi2kHk&t=107
 
manmountainbutters said:
Yeah. That was my feeling watching it in the moment also. I actually don't think it's as clear cut as many have said for precisely those reasons ... Tel not looking at Amp, and then Amp launching his nut at Tel's foot.

There is presumably a point at which such a coming together would NOT be a penalty, or do people think that irrespective of how avoidable (on the part of the forward) the collision was, and therefore how "bought" it is, the high feet always mean a pen?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ignoring refs that are bent and chose to not give things that they should...
A high boot making contact with another player should always be a foul.
Below is the criteria and the Tel one clearly falls into the careless "free kick only" category. A free kick in the box is a penalty.

www.premierleague.com

High foot challenges

www.premierleague.com www.premierleague.com

A high foot challenge may be considered:

Careless - free kick only​

-Limited (indirect) contact
-Low force
-Low speed
-Low awareness of opponent
-Low degree of danger
-High degree of control
-Sudden drop in height by opponent

Reckless - yellow card​

-Limited or partial contact
-Low/medium force
-Low/medium speed
-Limited awareness of opponent
-Sudden drop in height by opponent
-High degree of control
-Low/medium degree of danger

Excessive force - red card​

-Full contact
-High force
-High speed
-High point of contact
-Clear line of sight to opponent
-Fully extended leading leg
-High degree of danger
 
Matt1882 said:
Ignoring refs that are bent and chose to not give things that they should...
A high boot making contact with another player should always be a foul.
Below is the criteria and the Tel one clearly falls into the careless "free kick only" category. A free kick in the box is a penalty.

www.premierleague.com

High foot challenges

www.premierleague.com www.premierleague.com

A high foot challenge may be considered:

Careless - free kick only​

-Limited (indirect) contact
-Low force
-Low speed
-Low awareness of opponent
-Low degree of danger
-High degree of control
-Sudden drop in height by opponent

Reckless - yellow card​

-Limited or partial contact
-Low/medium force
-Low/medium speed
-Limited awareness of opponent
-Sudden drop in height by opponent
-High degree of control
-Low/medium degree of danger

Excessive force - red card​

-Full contact
-High force
-High speed
-High point of contact
-Clear line of sight to opponent
-Fully extended leading leg
-High degree of danger
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, I guess it's the question as to whether it was in fact a "challenge" by Tel. Or a needless and deliberate headbutt of the foot by Ampadu. I suspect it is this question that led to the long VAR review.
 
manmountainbutters said:
Yeah, I guess it's the question as to whether it was in fact a "challenge" by Tel. Or a needless and deliberate headbutt of the foot by Ampadu. I suspect it is this question that led to the long VAR review.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I read it that it doesn't matter if a players head hits the foot. If the foot us up there, you risk it being a foul.
Which is fine. As long as it's written in stone and applied consistently.
I don't think refs give it if a players head is low. I
 
Herclueless said:
So we've moved on from "nobody ever does that" to "well that's different because..."?

:mourthumb:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
As i said in the original post "Trying to clear a ball when its that high up in the air in your own box with a bicycle is very rare!"

You trying to claim clearances off the line, a bloke outside his box, and a Ronaldo one where the ball is not only heading to him, but far flatter and not straight up in the air as examples is ridiculous.

If you think them examples are similar to Tels where the ball is not only high but is vertical too, is seriously worrying. Like you said, he also earlier in the game nearly cost us yet again with him trying to be flash and instead of playing an early simple pass, got moved all the way back towards goal and nearly gifted them another goal. Braindead!
 
Last edited:
Herclueless said:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDNrZ2blGQc


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJAnMXZITc8


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yT-nCHrMVw8

There's 3 of them for you, these guys were all fortunate though in that no opposition player steamed in and headbutted their feet.

I don't for one second think Tel was trying to be "flash", I reckon he was trying to clear the ball in the best way he felt he could at that moment.

Had the ball been dropping on to the head of the Leeds player and Tel had appeared from nowhere to kick his head off then I'd fully agree that Tel was an idiot, as it was, the ball was dropping onto Tel's foot with the Leeds player nowhere near and them Ampadu inserted his head into the equation, that's Ampadu's fault not Tel's.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

loop dig GIF


You've been attending Richard Arlison's classes, admit it.
 
Matt1882 said:
If the foot us up there, you risk it being a foul.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's the way I understand it.

Which doesn't necessarily mean an attacking player can just barge his head in there searching for a foul, but I don't really think that's what Ampadu did.

Tel took a risk he shouldn't have and did in fact catch the player. Should have been given in real time, same as the Maddison one it's obvious Gillett is just leaving big calls for VAR to sort out which totally ruins the game.
 
Relying on players like him, Odobert, Gray, Bergvall etc has been such a massive mistake. It's always important to have young players in the squad but we have hoarded too many and given them roles in the squad that they simply aren't ready for.

It was Tel coming on and being completely useless that cost us the Super Cup, it's not fair to him to expect him to do the job of a mature player. He's a raw youngster who should be out on loan in a weaker league where he can play every minute and develop properly.

Going from playing on easy mode at Bayern to starting PL matches is not the proper way to develop an ordinary talent like him. We are not talking about a Dele/Yamal/Rooney situation. We're talking about a player who struggles to beat his man or even complete simple passes. People give Lange a small amount of praise for finding these young talents but what is his actual plan to develop them and maximise their talent? Why are we spending £40m on a player who is deemed not good enough for the CL squad and then keeping him around anyway? The way we've used Tel is just another damning indictment on the pathetic, non-existent football strategy from the club.
 
The mental gymnastics going on to try and excuse a completely fucking stupid decision that could in reality end up being a major factor in sending the club down is utterly fucking ridiculous.

It was in the air for about 3 seconds as he obviously shaped for a ball that was dropping to his fucking head, he's 6 fucking foot tall.

He took a massive, show-off, needless fucking extra risk in his own fucking penalty area and got what he deserved.
 
The Mercurial No.10 said:
The mental gymnastics going on to try and excuse a completely fucking stupid decision that could in reality end up being a major factor in sending the club down is utterly fucking ridiculous.

It was in the air for about 3 seconds as he obviously shaped for a ball that was dropping to his fucking head, he's 6 fucking foot tall.

He took a massive, show-off, needless fucking extra risk in his own fucking penalty area and got what he deserved.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not just that, but where was it going anyway? pointlessly back to Gnonto (? looks like him).

image-2026-05-15-153859261.png



No part of the decision to overhead kick it is anything other than completely brain dead
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top