Bit apples and oranges this comparison for me, especially when you consider how far Ospina came off his line to make his challenge on Oscar and the force with which it was made. 

 

Drogba's sending off was wrong in that it wasn't a yellow card offence because he made contact with the ball something Ospina didn't do. It can be given as a foul because Valdes had two hands on the ball meaning he is in control of it but Fisk was wrong in deeming it a yellow card offence... I've just re-watched it on YouTube, he also issues Drogba his 2nd yellow and red card whilst he is on the ground, which is actually against the rules, the player has to be on their feet to be issued with a caution, so all round bad officiating from Fisk. 

 

When you run at full force to make a challenge, you have to be in control, Ospina wasn't. If that was a sliding tackle, the players played the ball and then the slide challenges comes in late and with force, it's a yellow card, minimum, all day long. Same goes for a goalkeeper coming to claim a ball and hitting the attacker with force after failing to make contact with the ball. 

 

 

 

Your basically taking the goalkeeprs ability to do his job away from him with this interpretation. So should it have been a penalty if the gohst goal doesn't get given in the same year? 

 

You can't say stuff, like your not aloud to run full speed and you cant only run x meters of your line in y situation. It was his job to try and get the ball before oscar, it was a 50/50 ball, he didn't clatter oscar when oscar had the ball, that would have been a pen, he didn't bring oscar down when he wen't round him. That would have been a pen. It was a coming together when the ball had gone. I don't believe he intended to clatter oscar, it was a side affect as a result of him trying to get the ball and he didn't affect Oscar's ability to score. If my keeper doesn't show commitment I'd be pissed! 

He has picked up his form a bit, I have been impressed with him the last few games.

 

I hope he is here next season, we need more competition in his area though. I like him, I think he has a lot of potential to be a key player of this side, some could argue he already is, I think he needs to prove himself more but that's my perspective. I have gave him a lot of criticism because I think he loses the ball too much for a number 10, not because his dip in form. 

 

He needs to be better under pressure, he can click with the team we've seen that, not as consistently as we would have liked but we have seen it. But under pressure he seems to be incapable of making the right touch and the right quick pass, that for me is areas he needs to really improve on. 

Your basically taking the goalkeeprs ability to do his job away from him with this interpretation. So should it have been a penalty if the gohst goal doesn't get given in the same year? 

 

You can't say stuff, like your not aloud to run full speed and you cant only run x meters of your line in y situation. It was his job to try and get the ball before oscar, it was a 50/50 ball, he didn't clatter oscar when oscar had the ball, that would have been a pen, he didn't bring oscar down when he wen't round him. That would have been a pen. It was a coming together when the ball had gone. I don't believe he intended to clatter oscar, it was a side affect as a result of him trying to get the ball and he didn't affect Oscar's ability to score. If my keeper doesn't show commitment I'd be pissed! 

 

Yes it was his job to try and get the ball but he failed to do that and the consequence of rushing so far off of his line and full pelt meant that he made huge contact with attacking player, so much so that it impeded him from taking any further part in that phase of an attack. 

 

He's unsuccessfully challenged for the ball and followed through on the opposition player. That's more or less the definition of a foul. 

 

The contact probably wasn't intentional but that doesn't matter the fact that such heavy contact was made after failing to make contact with the ball means it is a foul. 

If it was or wasn't a foul who cares now? Oscar is fine and it wasn't given. You aren't going to agree and you've both made your points so let's concentrate on Leicester shall we?

So Barak, you don't think Schumacher committed a foul on Battiston?

 

You are responsible for your actions, and if you go out full throttle and then smash into a player after the player has kicked the ball, it is a foul, full stop.

 

I just don't get your logic.

I suppose in Oliver's defence, he's had to have this dialogue that people have had in this thread over two days, in the space of 2 seconds....

 

and I still don't think there's a definitive answer.

Edit: nvm, can't find a replay of it

 

Anyway, the kid is tough. Looks like a small kid but he takes knocks with the best of them.

Edited April 28, 201511 yr by Stim

Whilst I don't expect an official to explain every decision I would like to know in some cases what they saw at the time, what their views are after they've watched it back and if they'll learn from it (if it is a mistake). I know it can set a dangerous precedent but there has to be a middle ground, if an incorrect decision affects the outcome of an important match, surely the fans who have spent upwards of god knows deserve some sort of explanation?

Before Blue Daze comes in and says it can’t be done, it’ll change football for ever, the world will end etc… once again I’m not saying I have all the answers but there has to be some sort of system where an explanation is given? Perhaps in turn fans could understand an official’s point of view and be a bit more understanding.

I think you have to look at keepers a bit diffrently A, and B did he stop Oscar from scoring or playing the ball, No. The ball was gone, it was a collision of momentum. Tell ya what, I also don't think it was a pen in the CL semi against Liverpool, so I'm being consistent. The more i see it, the more I think about it. It's just not a pen. 

 

If oscar pushes the ball past him and is going to run on to it and the keeper stops him I agree its a pen but he'd had his shot

 

 

Have to say barak, you have put over your argument really well and have practically convinced me!

 

As it is a foul on a Chelsea player by an Arsenal player I would still be claiming penalty ALL DAY LONG, but from a neutral perspective, I think your argument is a good one and I also think the ref had a very good game.

I suppose in Oliver's defence, he's had to have this dialogue that people have had in this thread over two days, in the space of 2 seconds....

and I still don't think there's a definitive answer.

These are my thoughts on the matter as well. Hell Ive gone back and fourth so many times and In still not sure how I feel about it. Thought Oliver did well considering the circumstances, there was plenty of difficult calls in that game.

Whilst I don't expect an official to explain every decision I would like to know in some cases what they saw at the time, what their views are after they've watched it back and if they'll learn from it (if it is a mistake). I know it can set a dangerous precedent but there has to be a middle ground, if an incorrect decision affects the outcome of an important match, surely the fans who have spent upwards of god knows deserve some sort of explanation?

Before Blue Daze comes in and says it can’t be done, it’ll change football for ever, the world will end etc… once again I’m not saying I have all the answers but there has to be some sort of system where an explanation is given? Perhaps in turn fans could understand an official’s point of view and be a bit more understanding.

Spot on as usual Gem, things do need to change. I'm not jumping on video tech or anything like that to the extreme just yet but a case for the refs to talk about what they have done and why would go a long way. Also a little humility in the yeah I got it wrong camp would actually really help the respect campaign.

Whilst I don't expect an official to explain every decision I would like to know in some cases what they saw at the time, what their views are after they've watched it back and if they'll learn from it (if it is a mistake). I know it can set a dangerous precedent but there has to be a middle ground, if an incorrect decision affects the outcome of an important match, surely the fans who have spent upwards of god knows deserve some sort of explanation?

Before Blue Daze comes in and says it can’t be done, it’ll change football for ever, the world will end etc… once again I’m not saying I have all the answers but there has to be some sort of system where an explanation is given? Perhaps in turn fans could understand an official’s point of view and be a bit more understanding.

 

I actually agree. I think there are some instances where refs want to clarify their decisions but the rules forbid it. Obviously there are other occasions where it would become a case of 'what the f**k were you thinking?' but I've long thought there needs to be greater responsibility from refs, and if not that just a touch more transparency.

 

So there

Edited April 28, 201511 yr by Blue Daze

 

Have to say barak, you have put over your argument really well and have practically convinced me!

 

As it is a foul on a Chelsea player by an Arsenal player I would still be claiming penalty ALL DAY LONG, but from a neutral perspective, I think your argument is a good one and I also think the ref had a very good game.

 

 

Nibs - when the incident occurred what do you think the first thing I did, and what do you think the first words out of my mouth were :) 

 

Of course it was a penalty because its a chelsea player... thats a given in any circumstance..

So Barak, you don't think Schumacher committed a foul on Battiston?

 

You are responsible for your actions, and if you go out full throttle and then smash into a player after the player has kicked the ball, it is a foul, full stop.

 

I just don't get your logic.

 

 

Very different - look at the Schumacer incident, after he ball is kicked he accelerates towards Battiston and completely changes his body position. His pure intention was to hurt the attacker. 

Hmm, you must be a solicitor or barrister.   I still do not agree with you, but I admire the way you support your position.

I think you have to look at keepers a bit diffrently A, and B did he stop Oscar from scoring or playing the ball, No.

 

Of course he stopped Oscar from scoring. If he stays on his line, Oscar scores, and he knows it. He comes out solely to stop Oscar scoring. He takes a risk, as all keepers do when they come out. He gets there late, he catches him. That's a pen my friend.

 

Nibs, stop encouraging him.

Of course he stopped Oscar from scoring. If he stays on his line, Oscar scores, and he knows it. He comes out solely to stop Oscar scoring. He takes a risk, as all keepers do when they come out. He gets there late, he catches him. That's a pen my friend.

Nibs, stop encouraging him.

Davey in to save the day with voice of reason!

Davey in to save the day with voice of reason!

 

 

Haha.

 

Thank you very much.

 

Note to barak, goalies are trying to stop goals.

 

That's why they're on the pitch !

Of course he stopped Oscar from scoring. If he stays on his line, Oscar scores, and he knows it. He comes out solely to stop Oscar scoring. He takes a risk, as all keepers do when they come out. He gets there late, he catches him. That's a pen my friend.

Nibs, stop encouraging him.

Some questions DB if you will.

When he collides with Oscar does Oscar have control of the ball?

Let's imagine for a moment that Oscar effort goes in we score. Who hoo, now let's say Ospina manages to stop right in front of Oscar stands his ground and then Oscars momentum after lofting the ball goal wards takes him in to the keeper. Are you cool with the goal being disallowed? Because Oscar stopped the keeper from getting back, I can tell you I'd be pissed of if the goal was chalked off?

Back to the actual event, if Ospina manages to stop and Oscar manages to get round him can you honestly say that Oscar would have scored, abasaloutly not.

Another one, before Ospina collides with Oscar, has he done anything illegal to prevent Oscar from scoring?

Again, if he takes the ball down and has control of it understand, but in no way did Ospina illegally stop Oscar from scoring. He came out, he gave Oscar no time and forced him, quite legally in to taking a shot on goal. Collisions happen in football, its a contact sport.

I notice no one wants to say the ghost goal should have been a penalty... Because it shouldn't have been, garcia was no where near the ball, it was a coming together of two players. We should have won the CL that year.. It wasn't even a goal. Any way no pen

Oscar shoots, Ospina is late, Ospina fouls Oscar.

 

What's the difference between a field player who plays the ball and then gets tackled by a defender who arrives too late. 99% of the time that results in a foul and a yellow card. Exactly what shoud have happened here. 

Oscar shoots, Ospina is late, Ospina fouls Oscar.

What's the difference between a field player who plays the ball and then gets tackled by a defender who arrives too late. 99% of the time that results in a foul and a yellow card. Exactly what shoud have happened here.

Because we can apply sence to the situation.. If he's not chelsea it's never a foul

I think you have to look at keepers a bit diffrently A, and B did he stop Oscar from scoring or playing the ball, No. The ball was gone, it was a collision of momentum. Tell ya what, I also don't think it was a pen in the CL semi against Liverpool, so I'm being consistent. The more i see it, the more I think about it. It's just not a pen.

If oscar pushes the ball past him and is going to run on to it and the keeper stops him I agree its a pen but he'd had his shot

Whose to say that Oscar wouldn't of rounded the keeper and tucked his own chip shot away, of course assuming the goalie doesn't wipe him out?

If Oscar had his shot, the goalie completely misses the ball and takes out Oscar, then it's a late challenge and a foul after the shot. Still a penalty as its a foul in the box.

If you can show me the section of FIFA's laws of football that states a goalie can miss the ball, but still wipe out the player, then I'll agree not a penalty . If this was legal, no keeper would ever let a ball go in their box unchallenged. They would go for it and if they can't get the ball just take out the player, exactly as Ospina did to Oscar. But goalies don't because it's illegal and the ref's tend to call it.

Was it a foul? Yes, no debate as per fifa rules of the game. The only debate is the color of the card that should be shown and that's the only point where I think your after the shot part has merit because you can certainly foul someone right after they've taken a shot if the ball is still in play ( and if it's not,wouldn't that make the offence more reckless and deserving of discipline?).

Edited April 28, 201511 yr by Barry Bridges

It's a foul every single time.

He get's to the ball first...Keeper get's nothing of it....Keeper clatters into said player who then can no longer continue to get any advantage.

Yellow card, Penalty Kick, 1-0 Chelsea.

Matters not a jot who the player plays for, it's pretty simple.

Sorry can't be arsed reading the posts right now but I don't know how anyone can say that it isn't a penalty. It is one of the most clear penalties I've seen, since Larssens nudge on Ramires last season which was said to be "great defending" from the great Alan Hansen himself. 

Edit: nvm, can't find a replay of it

 

Anyway, the kid is tough. Looks like a small kid but he takes knocks with the best of them.

 

 

are you talking about this play?

 

The way I was taught to play the game, is that if you make a challenge & miss the ball it's a foul. So if you look again, it's a foul on the gooner. The refs failed us again.