- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Bring the "Uncatchable Ball" concept to soccer
Posted on 6/30/19 at 1:14 pm
Posted on 6/30/19 at 1:14 pm
In football they've had the Uncatchable ball rule for Pass interference for a while. It's common sense, a contact (foul) may have occurred, but in the judgement of the ref, the player had zero shot at catching the ball anyway, so no foul is called.
I see fouls called in soccer where the player had no shot of retaining possession. Typically, the player's touch of the ball is too strong so they decide to fall/flop and kick their foot or drag it to initiate contact.
Here are a couple examples, but don't really capture what I'm referring. It's only a foul if it credibly influences the outcome. If the ball was going to go out of bounds or the player would have lost possession, then it's not a foul.
I see fouls called in soccer where the player had no shot of retaining possession. Typically, the player's touch of the ball is too strong so they decide to fall/flop and kick their foot or drag it to initiate contact.
Here are a couple examples, but don't really capture what I'm referring. It's only a foul if it credibly influences the outcome. If the ball was going to go out of bounds or the player would have lost possession, then it's not a foul.
This post was edited on 6/30/19 at 1:16 pm
3
Posted on 6/30/19 at 1:19 pm to Kujo
Most of the gifs you posted have nothing to do with what you're proposing. Some of those are just dives. On the last one you posted, the player could have gotten to the ball before it went out.
This post was edited on 6/30/19 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 6/30/19 at 1:20 pm to Kujo
And are you saying they should have free reign as long as the player can't get to the ball? How about just don't foul the guy?
Posted on 6/30/19 at 1:30 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
Most of the gifs you posted have nothing to do with what you're proposing.
yes, because these are "flops". I more mean a "ticky tack" "by rule" foul occurred, the ref giving the foul much more an award than the "foul".
Common thing is a forward and fullback are running toward a free rolling ball, forward gets there a split second before the fullback but all he does is kick it 30 yards ahead (going out of bounds) as the fullback makes contact. If no contact occurred the only outcome would be a goal kick, but instead the ref awards a free kick from close range.
Like football, the db shouldn't have grabbed the wrs arm, but the ball was 10 yards over his head, so it would have been incomplete regards of the contract.
hard fouls do not apply, this is ticky tack flop to minimal contact type plays im referring.
Posted on 6/30/19 at 1:37 pm to Kujo
The defense will exploit that in a heartbeat. It'll be much different than just a light grab of a shoulder before the ball arrives. It'll be people stepping on feet, kicking ankles, etc. Will be a disaster and will escalate tensions, increase possible injuries, start fights, etc. Just don't foul the guy in the first place. The introduction of VAR will knock out a lot of the dives.
Posted on 6/30/19 at 3:29 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
Will be a disaster and will escalate tensions, increase possible injuries, start fights, etc.
Then why not eject or caution the player with no spot foul? It would be similar to how refs go back and caution people later on after advantage is played. Also Similar to uncatchable ball NFL - If the defender leads with the crown of his helmet and nails the wide receiver in the head on an uncatchabls ball 40 yards down the field, the player would be ejected and no pass interference called at the spot.
This post was edited on 7/1/19 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 6/30/19 at 3:39 pm to Kujo
Why does the rule have to correlate to something in football?
If a player is fouled, then he is fouled. Whether he is possessing the ball, has lost the ball and won’t retain possession, or is on the completely opposite side of the field from the ball should have no baring on the foul call if a foul was committed.
If a player is fouled, then he is fouled. Whether he is possessing the ball, has lost the ball and won’t retain possession, or is on the completely opposite side of the field from the ball should have no baring on the foul call if a foul was committed.
Posted on 6/30/19 at 4:07 pm to SUB
quote:Pretty sure there would still be a 15 yard penalty.
If the defender leads with the crown of his helmet and nails the wide receiver in the head on an uncatchabls ball 40 yards down the field, the player would be ejected and no pass interference called at the spot.
Posted on 6/30/19 at 7:21 pm to pvilleguru
quote:
Pretty sure there would still be a 15 yard penalty.
Not the point. The spot foul in football, let’s say at the goal line, is a gimme touchdown, sort of like a penalty is a gimme goal. 15 yard penalty is a ding.
Posted on 6/30/19 at 9:11 pm to theOG
Because it’s retarded to award a PK, essentially a goal, in a sport where it’s so hard to score for a foul that had no impact on the outcome of a play
Posted on 6/30/19 at 9:54 pm to RandySavage
quote:
Because it’s retarded to award a PK, essentially a goal, in a sport where it’s so hard to score for a foul that had no impact on the outcome of a play
This. Too many times a PK awarded for something ticky tack or where the forward initiates contact. Like a 3 pt shooter kicking his leg out to get hit by a defender passing by, or that fake to get them in the air then jump into the defender. In basketball, there's a chance the shot will go in, but in soccer it's extremely unlikely in a super majority of the fouls called, that they would have scored if they were not fouled. That's why some players seem to play to get fouled over actually creating a scoring opportunity. The foul gives them a better chance of scoring.
Posted on 7/1/19 at 8:10 am to RandySavage
quote:
Because it’s retarded to award a PK, essentially a goal, in a sport where it’s so hard to score for a foul that had no impact on the outcome of a play
If you don't foul the player in the box, a penalty will not be awarded. This is the outcome of probably 99% of possessions in the box.
Football is not like soccer. In football, you have one play and then the play stops, starts again, and so on. In soccer, play is free flowing and everything that happens can affect things that may or may not happen later in the flow of play, like the butterfly effect.
Someone could be fouled off of the ball (but in the box) and knocked down. Another player could take a shot which is deflected by the keeper and had that previous player not been knocked down, he could have been there to finish even though when he was originally fouled it may have appeared not to impacted the outcome of the play.
Don't foul in the box and a penalty won't be awarded.
Posted on 7/1/19 at 9:24 am to theOG
quote:
Football is not like soccer. In football, you have one play and then the play stops, starts again, and so on.
Correct
quote:
In soccer, play is free flowing and everything that happens can affect things that may or may not happen later in the flow of play, like the butterfly effect.
Not in the case of when advantage is given. Let's say a person is fouled after playing a through ball to a teammate and the referee allows the play to continue and the teammate scores. The uncalled foul had no effect on what happened after.
quote:
Don't foul in the box and a penalty won't be awarded.
We know this. The point of this thread is that it shouldn't be that simple and there's a great disparity in the types of fouls that occur in the box and almost all are awarded a Penalty, which usually is converted. I get that it's just part of the game but I don't see why we can't discuss how things can be improved. In an ideal world, Penalties would mostly be given for fouls that took away goal scoring opportunities, and other types of fouls awarded indirect kicks or no call at all (like in the OP). It's hard to measure if a goal scoring opportunity is being taken away in many cases, which I think is why there's a "catch-all" with fouls in the box.
This post was edited on 7/1/19 at 10:15 am
Posted on 7/1/19 at 12:22 pm to SUB
quote:
indirect kicks
I could get behind more indirect kicks in the box.
Posted on 7/1/19 at 1:18 pm to theOG
Doesn't matter the punishment does not fit the crime. The worst is when a player and keeper are going for a 50 50 ball and the attacker gets there a split second before and touches the ball with zero control straight out of bounds but the keeper barely touches him and he goes down. Should never ever be a pen
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News