Monreal played well for the first half of last season, but in 2016 he's been a liability and it seems absurd to rely on a 30 year old who isn't particularly that great technically or endowed with any pace.
He was a total embarrassment against PSG and will continue to be against any right sided wingers with any great trickery or pace....clearly the biggest issue in the side currently.
Wasn't me who spotted it, to be fair.Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn
I post it on FB in a discussion on there about this and someone else pointed that out.
So I'm back to my original position: ridiculous red card and I bet you'll see very few more like that this season.
I'm not sure it was a red but Xhaka left himself at the mercy of the ref by being so rash, especially as Ox said they had been told about the rule before the start of the season. Arguably you could say it was a goal scoring opportunity as they were about to hit us on the break with four against two. I do have to applaud Xhaka's cynical approach in stopping what should have been a great chance for Swansea to score again. We've missed that mentality for a while now.
No, that challenge was clear enough. No replay required. Are you saying that's the benchmark for this new rule? Fine, then why do we need replays for dives? If they are as blatant as that then straight red and no need for a replay either. And if there's doubt on either side then no red. I'm sure that's what they intend, but I found it odd you wanted further proof of a dive and yet were prepared to accept the ref's call without backup in the case of this new rule.
Für eure Sicherheit
It's still a red if the ref considers it a goal scoring opportunity outside of the box. We're looking at a 4 on 2 situation if Xhaka doesn't make that foul. A yellow card or free kick doesn't restore the opportunity so it's a red card. Let's be honest, if Xhaka doesn't commit that foul, they could have scored with that counter.
Q9: Why was the ‘triple punishment’ for denial of an obvious goal-scoring opportunity (DOGSO) offences changed for offences in the penalty area?
The main reason is that the award of a penalty kick effectively ‘restores’ the obvious goal-scoring opportunity that was denied by the foul. It was felt that a penalty, red card and suspension (the three/triple punishment) was too strong so the red card has become a caution (YC) but only for DOGSO offences which are an attempt to play the ball or challenge an opponent for the ball.
Q10: Is every DOGSO offence in the penalty now only a caution (YC)?
NO – the Law has only changed for those DOGSO offences in the penalty area where the offender makes an attempt to play the ball or challenge an opponent for the ball. The sending-off (RC) remains for: handball holding, pulling and pushing (as these offences are not an attempt to play the ball) making no attempt to play the ball e.g. a deliberate trip an offence when there was no chance/possibility of the ball being played
Q11: Can a DOGSO offence outside the penalty area be punished with a caution (YC)? NO – unlike a penalty kick, a free kick is not an obvious chance to score a goal so it does not ‘restore’ the obvious goal-scoring opportunity that was denied by the offence - the disciplinary sanction for all DOGSO offences outside the penalty area remains a sending-off (RC).
Q12: If a player commits a DOGSO offence punished by an indirect free kick (IDFK) in the penalty area what is the disciplinary sanction? The change relating to DOGSO offences is only when the referee awards a penalty kick. This is because the penalty kick effectively restores the lost obvious goal-scoring opportunity. As an IDFK does not restore the lost obvious goal-scoring opportunity, the sanction for any DOGSO offence resulting in an IDFK is a sending-off (RC).
Read more at http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-...omerTOOZpKW.99
Even if a player is bearing down on goal and is brought down it's not considered a clear goal scoring opportunity if there is a covering defender who might have got accross.
To say that a player in his own half was denied a goal scoring opportunity is ludicrouse.
It was a quick break which may well have led to one but you could say that about any quick break, surely?
Because a dive isn't that blatant. If the ref is 100% sure it's a dive then it should be a sending off but these days it never is that simple where a player goes over with nobody next to him. As said, just watch the below.
It's clear what Xhaka did and that foul helped us.
Technicalities. I think the ref got the spirit of the rule right. Say the score was 3-3 and we were on the receiving end of that sort of challenge with Ox being brought down instead? A yellow card would seem like an injustice. The opportunity is gone and who wouldn't do that if it stops an opportunity and only results in a yellow?
[QUOTE=Munchies;539446]
Look at the opportunity.
Plus Xhaka jumps off the to make that challenge. Isn't that deemed reckless and out of control? There is a reason why we haven't challenged this one. It's just dumb and blatant. Wenger just needs to have a word with him because we don't usually have players that make such obvious fouls.
The headline of being in his own half makes it sound ridiculous but in one second he would've been in our side of the pitch. The likelihood of a goal scoring chance is probably a lot higher when they are likely to have twice as many players bearing down on goal compared to those defending it. If it was made under the guideline of preventing a goal scoring opportunity, I think the ref made a fair call on that given that a goal scoring opportunity was extremely likely to occur from that scenario. It's not like it was 3 in 3, or they had just broken out of their penalty area then Xhaka commits the foul.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
