The tactical foul

[Grebfromgrebland]

Used by villa against us excessively without any recourse.

[Nalis]

Tactical fouls have been around for years.

 

Only difference being they were called cyncial fouls beforehand and before that just 'fouls'.

[st albans fox]

7 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Don`t actually think it would be that difficult.

Based on,

• when possession is lost, and for the next defined period of play/time
• who interferes with the counter-attacking player,
• other opposition players committing infringements on the counter-attacking teams players who intend to contribute in the counter-attack

There will be times when players collide, feet tangle, but these are quantifiable given to reasonable levels of inspection

(Something obviously VAR is magnificent at..but VAR is not live in this hindsight viewing)

 

The key would be HOW the infringing team is punished.

Maybe it is time to implement a foul count, those who pass the foul get and commit as above get a yellow card retrospectively

Realise it is not perfect, but if something could be done, it should be.

 

 

Perhaps any infringement where you make a foul and you weren’t goalside of the player you have fouled should be a straight yellow, as long as the player is running away from you - if the player chooses to stop their forward momentum then you are entitled to try to tackle them 

 

 if you choose to tackle from the wrong side then you know the risk of not getting the ball ...wherever you are on the pitch ..  that includes on the edge of the opponents penalty area!

 

VAR should be allowed to intervene to prevent players allowing themselves to be caught by an opponent who cannot avoid bumping into them - that’s a bit tricky but should be just about enforceable.... I can see issues though and it may just be that there is no solution ....

[urban fox]

This has been going on for years. Back in the day it was referred to as "professional foul". However, this was generally when a player was away and the opposition brought them down to prevent a clear chance. In fact it was in response to how common place this was happening that the rules were changed to make it a straight red card offence if the defender was the last man/stopping a clear goal scoring opportunity.  As previously stated, sometimes a player will take one for the team, similar to handball on the line to stop a clear goal.

What I do not like, and which is creeping into the game more and more, is the little niggly pulls and ankle taps etc that occur as soon as a team loses possession which prevents the opposition from transitioning quickly, and counter attacking and then allows them time to regroup.  As the majority of these fouls are committed high up the pitch, and generally are quite innocuous in themselves (ie not malicious, two footed, high etc) they do not even draw a yellow. It is also quite noticeable, that teams use this as a deliberate tactic to prevent opponents from gaining any momentum, and will regularly rotate the players committing the fouls so that no player is singled out for persistent fouling by the officials.

TBF to the refs, they are in a difficult situation. I am sure that many of them are aware of what is going on, but are powerless to prevent it, as no individual foul warrants a card in itself.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

1 hour ago, Dan LCFC said:

It just baffles me that with VAR you don't clamp down on more of this, or award more bookings as the game goes. For me you could easily have somebody on VAR watching the game and informing the referee "Fabinho needs to be booked for a tactical foul" and at the next break, the referee gives him a yellow.

 

I just don't get why with VAR they don't really clamp down on things like this. What is the reason for it?

The powers that be have decided, in their wisdom, that it won’t be used for bookings.

 

Of course stopping a counter attack with a deliberate foul couldn’t possibly be a game changer ffs. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 

 

[Winchesterfox]

You could do a few things about it.

 

1.  Give an automatic booking to players who commit a certain number of tactical /more minor fouls (maybe two or three), on top of existing bookings for bad fouls etc.  

 

2.  Send players who get booked to a sin bin for ten minutes.  

 

3.  Rotational fouling is harder to stop.  Ultimately the only sanction that works for teams with big, high quality squads who foul a lot is a points deduction.  

[filbertway]

Villa should have had about 5 yellows first half. Nakamba should have had 2 reds. Officials in this country are embarrassing and deserve no respect. I'm all for players digging them out on the pitch when they constantly look so smug after making bad decision after bad decision.

 

They ref the game how they think it should be reffed rather than by the laws and rules of the game. Find it really odd that Sky and BT don't pick them up on it more.

[Leicester_Loyal]

It's becoming a problem because referees aren't booking players often for doing it. Against WHU, they committed 19 fouls and were given one yellow card, which was the bloody penalty! Burnley committed 14 against us, again one yellow card (which was against the penalty). Southampton committed 17 and were given 3 yellows, which is probably about right. Until this changes teams will continue to do it. I don't know why we don't do it more often, foul the opponent further away from our goal to break down the counter attack.

[Nalis]

1 hour ago, Winchesterfox said:

You could do a few things about it.

 

1.  Give an automatic booking to players who commit a certain number of tactical /more minor fouls (maybe two or three), on top of existing bookings for bad fouls etc.  

 

2.  Send players who get booked to a sin bin for ten minutes.  

 

3.  Rotational fouling is harder to stop.  Ultimately the only sanction that works for teams with big, high quality squads who foul a lot is a points deduction.  

I thought persistent fouling equated to a yellow card but thinking about it I havent seen a yellow card for persistent fouling in ages. Have they scrapped it?

[drofmor55]

Southampton,Burnley,Norwich,Villa etc..its a tactic that they all employ ...a high percentage of thier challenges are borderline fouls...the pressure to stay in the Premier League is such that any advantage you can get by doing this or cutting down on time the ball is in actual play its something they know they can get away with. The only way to cut down on this is for refs to be stronger and clamp down on it, but as in the game against Villa the easy option for the ref is to just ignore it.

Its like the holding in the penalty area at corners..they might talk about clamping down on it but dont build your hopes up.

I suspect the the FA like the controversy and subsequent media talk...it help keeps the high profile of the Premier League

[Royston.]

Its part of the game but referees probably dont want to address it, they have enough shít to be incompetent with already.

[Dan LCFC]

3 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

One of my main quibbles is that VAR seems to exclusively concentrate on fouls in the end thirds of the pitch, with nothing in the middle getting examined, unless it's potentially a sending off offence.

 

Times I've seen fouls not given going seemingly unreviewed,, then maybe 10-12 passes later a goal. If that  foul had happened 3-4 passes before a goal, it gets scrutinized - often in far too much detail.

That fundamentally is why in its current form it's flawed.

 

Offside in the build up to a goal 30 seconds before - no goal.

 

Corner wrongly given which said team scores from - goal.

 

How does that make any sense?

[Winchesterfox]

2 hours ago, Nalis said:

I thought persistent fouling equated to a yellow card but thinking about it I havent seen a yellow card for persistent fouling in ages. Have they scrapped it?

No, but it's at the ref's discretion, and they aren't using that discretion enough.  

[Winchesterfox]

4 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

One of my main quibbles is that VAR seems to exclusively concentrate on fouls in the end thirds of the pitch, with nothing in the middle getting examined, unless it's potentially a sending off offence.

 

Times I've seen fouls not given going seemingly unreviewed,, then maybe 10-12 passes later a goal. If that  foul had happened 3-4 passes before a goal, it gets scrutinized - often in far too much detail.

I agree.  Teams have got smarter about tactical fouling, by a) doing it further from their own goal and b) rotating who fouls.  

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

A promising attack broken up by a cynical or clear foul nearly always results in a yellow card or even a second yellow card, everyone does it and everyone gets punished according to the letter of the law, no problems from me on that front.

 

Case in point matic last night, no way that's a yellow card foul but because the opposition team were breaking with numbers it was punished accordingly.

Edited 30 January 2020 by Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot
.

[trabuch]

A player is supposed to get a yellow card if he "commits a foul or handles the ball to interfere with or stop a promising attack'. 

 

The part of this law that is ambiguous is "stop a promising attack" What does promising mean. All attacks are promising - and if it wasn't promising why commit the foul. I honestly think that for any deliberate foul play the ref must take serious note, and if he doesn't think it warrants a yellow first time should give one next time. Particularly if the team as a whole is doing it - which Villa have admitted to:

 

Aston Villa defender Kortney Hause admitted his side resorted to "the dirty side of the game" to secure their place in the final.

"The game plan was not to give them any respect and go up against them and foul them," said Hause.

"As soon as they looked like they were going to break through, bring them down, break up the play."

 

Five years ago this wouldn't have bothered me. But now we have a skillful and slightly lightweight team I've changed my mind!!

[Ian Nacho]

Almost should be an orange card. No yellow card should ever be a good yellow card to take.

[KrefelderFox666]

13 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

Almost should be an orange card. No yellow card should ever be a good yellow card to take.

I think this is where a sin bin would work well. Give the player a yellow card plus a 5/10 minute sin bin. Do it again and it's second yellow and goodnight. Refs have to be ruthless and punish.

 

On a different note, if someone clearly obstructs a goal from being scored (e.g. handball on the line, chopping a player down as he's about to score into an empty net etc.), don't give a red card and penalty, just give the goal.

[st albans fox]

28 minutes ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

I think this is where a sin bin would work well. Give the player a yellow card plus a 5/10 minute sin bin. Do it again and it's second yellow and goodnight. Refs have to be ruthless and punish.

 

On a different note, if someone clearly obstructs a goal from being scored (e.g. handball on the line, chopping a player down as he's about to score into an empty net etc.), don't give a red card and penalty, just give the goal.

I’ve seen some pretty incredible misses from six yards out and no keeper or defender ............

[urban fox]

1 hour ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

I think this is where a sin bin would work well. Give the player a yellow card plus a 5/10 minute sin bin. Do it again and it's second yellow and goodnight. Refs have to be ruthless and punish.

 

On a different note, if someone clearly obstructs a goal from being scored (e.g. handball on the line, chopping a player down as he's about to score into an empty net etc.), don't give a red card and penalty, just give the goal.

In rugby they have the penalty try which is pretty much what you are proposing.  It could only apply though when it absolutely nailed on

[HybridFox]

Maybe introducing a sin bin for such fouls could work.

 

But judging by how bad VAR has been implemented, I wouldn't be keen on rule changes at the moment!

[HybridFox]

2 hours ago, urban fox said:

In rugby they have the penalty try which is pretty much what you are proposing.  It could only apply though when it absolutely nailed on

Suarez handball to prevent Ghana scoring comes to mind. When clearly the ball was going in, a penalty goal should be given.

[trabuch]

The result of a foul should NEVER be advantageous to the team committing the foul.  These days, it seems,  they often are.

[Fox of WA]

Has there ever been any serious discussion of a sin bin being added in or is it always idle talk?

[CosbehFox]

Everyone knows it happens. The lad saying publicly is dim as now referees have a natural tendency to look for it when officiating Villa