Welcome to the TTP community

Be apart of something great, join today!

World Cup Finals:

bulljive

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2003
2,610
1,296
Tokens
1,944
Dirty Money
100
Well then, maybe explain to me what he's doing with his hand as he looks directly down? Perhaps a fcuking jumping jack? He's not jumping, he's on the way back down. Stop making shite up and admit you got it wrong; at least that way you'll only look like half a donkey...

I’d Iike to videotape 50 corner kicks coming in your direction, deflections, everything. See how “natural” your arms look as your body reacts in a split second. The whole natural position thing is ridiculous anyway, why they call natural is completely unnatural. Intent is intentionally making a decision to make yourself bigger or intending to block it with your hand. How you can watch that video and be 100% sure is beyond me. Like I said he calls it live and I would live with it. Every corner there are players “intentionally” obstructing, holding. Nonsense.
 

bulljive

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2003
2,610
1,296
Tokens
1,944
Dirty Money
100
Try jumping in the air and on the way down, lifting your knee up reacting to a ball. Pay attention to what your hand does. Yes it looks awkward I agree. But I think there is zero intent. How many players and pundits are saying right call?
 

mtkb

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2011
1,871
1,253
Tokens
2,642
Dirty Money
100
well, I see clear intent to block the ball. whether it's an instinctive reaction or something he's specifically trying to hide and get away, either way I think he's trying to use his entire left side to defend against the cross, and it's a penalty.
 

Yoda

Staff member
Lifetime Better Bastard
Jul 25, 2001
29,444
40,030
Tokens
55,166
Dirty Money
3,267
Oh, still ball-to-hand.

Isn’t it always ball to hand? Aren’t all hand balls when someone changes the position of their hand or arm to impede the travel of the ball making it ball to hand? I’m trying to picture a scenario where it’s hand to ball, like when a keeper makes a save
 

Dude

Lifetime Better Bastard
Jul 23, 2001
16,735
4,590
Tokens
15,679
Dirty Money
1,957
Yoda: walk away from the device. Go straight to the bathroom, look in the mirror. Hold up right hand, show all five fingers. Take right hand, strike yourself hard across your right cheek, and say to yourself, "I'm an idiot, I'm ugly, and nobody likes me".

...with all due respect.
 

Yoda

Staff member
Lifetime Better Bastard
Jul 25, 2001
29,444
40,030
Tokens
55,166
Dirty Money
3,267
Yoda: walk away from the device. Go straight to the bathroom, look in the mirror. Hold up right hand, show all five fingers. Take right hand, strike yourself hard across your right cheek, and say to yourself, "I'm an idiot, I'm ugly, and nobody likes me".

...with all due respect.

If that’s not a handball, then he’s as uncoordinated as you @Dude, if that’s even possible. He knew exactly what he was doing
 

Yoda

Staff member
Lifetime Better Bastard
Jul 25, 2001
29,444
40,030
Tokens
55,166
Dirty Money
3,267
LOL, clearly "no question", except almost nobody thinks so, except those that do. Very conclusive.

The ref, the VAR guys, the guys in akslops video which I believe the announcer calls a “rules expert”, and all the smart people in this thread.
 

Yoda

Staff member
Lifetime Better Bastard
Jul 25, 2001
29,444
40,030
Tokens
55,166
Dirty Money
3,267
well you guys have to make a decision soon....the crowd are getting restless, some players have got back to their hotels....so is it a penalty or not?

Clearly, no question

@Dude i’ll give you this. Was there enough to overrule and change his mind, probably not. Did he intentionally put his hand in the path of the ball? I think so.
 
Last edited:

LION

Lifetime Better Bastard
Mar 24, 2002
1,195
423
Tokens
1,826
Dirty Money
406
There is no way. Ever. That that was a hand ball worthy of a PK in that moment in that match. Ever.
He did not block it with his hand on purpose in any way. The French player was so close to touching it before Perisic does. It gets by the Matuidi and within .003 of a second it hits Perisic in the hand.
Even if it got through, there was the Croatian defender right there, next in line to clear. It was not a shot on net. It was not going to get by Perisic for a tap in or easy chance far post. None of the above. It was a nothing play, that turned in to a goal for France. Cheap way to go up 2-1 in a World Cup final.

Croatia was the much better side. First half they did not deserve to be down 2-1. First goal isn’t even a foul. Then to give that PK is robbery. 10000% robbery.
Let the men play. Let them play and score in open play. Don’t make that decision as a ref. If you have to slow it down and question it that much, then it’s not a PK.
It’s clear on how many people are arguing it that it wasn’t a Pk that it shouldn’t be one.

In soccer giving a PK needs to be so clear that it was one. Essentially you are giving a team a goal. I’d guess in 86% of the PK’s.

If ref saw it, in the real time speed of the game. Then sure. But to go slow things down on corner kicks? Where balls are bouncing and deflections happen so much in the box. That’s bush league.

Every person on TSN at half time said no PK. And mostly every player and past coach are saying no PK.
You simply can’t call that. It changed the entire game. And it wasn’t even close to being a dangerous scoring chance nothing.

Sure guys can go off on “rules” and it blocked the ball from going further central in to the box.
I’m a massive believer in “feeling” the game and not being a robot ref. There are different scenarios where calls are made and when they are not. If you disagree with this. You are a massive idiot.
Later in the match, the ball clearly strikes the Croatian defender in the arm. In the box. Even more clear then the PK call. But no call. No video. Nothing. Why?
Why do some infractions go to VAR and some others don’t?

If it’s your first hard foul of the match doesn’t get a yellow. But perhaps the players 4th foul of the half, but it’s super light, gets a yellow. Everything is taken in consideration. Minute it’s in, importance of game, scoreline, reputation as a player, past calls, what coach is yelling to team, what energy is like in game or coming from one team.
So a foul happens. But you have to take all the above in consideration.

Captain of the team, foaming out the mouth, angry, yelling instructions that sounds angry, “next time get a piece Gary, show him your there, etc etc”.

Gary next tackle goes through a guy.
Gary probably gets a yellow.

Captain of the team, yelling positive instructions in a leadership manor “Gary, let’s go, step step, press your man”

Gary goes through a guy, Gary doesn’t get a yellow”
Exact same tackle. But the energy of team, is different. I can come up with so many more examples.

What I’m trying to say. Is every match, moment, minute of match has a different magnitude and effect on the game.

After giving a free kick away that was clearly a dive and not a free kick. And France score on it. You must know the mistake was there. You have an ear piece. A guys in your ear I’m sure.
How do you go and give another questionable call to France, to essentially give them a goal. Again. You can’t. It ruins the match. You have to know that the possession arrow is facing Croatia’s way and if there is any question to be had, you don’t make the call punishing the team you already put down 1-0 somewhat.
Game management.

Nobody can argue that the ref has too big of a stamp on the game. All we are talking about Are the two BS goals that France scored. Not the beauty goal from Perisic from open play. Not Croatia out playing France through the 90 plus minutes. (Yes there is out possessing that doesn’t mean all that much these days, but pretty clear that France was playing scared and Croatia were on the front foot that match)

My thumbs are getting tired.

Long story short. The ref ruined the match. Two questionable calls that both turned in to goals for France when they didn’t really deserve one in the first half. 1-1 at half would have made that game amazing for the world to watch. The right thing for football and all neutral fans.
It gave France a massive lead at the half. And played in to their tourney strength of sitting deep and absorbing, then hitting back on the counter with Mbappe and friends.


Check this out; and there are many others like it online. I haven’t seen one x pro player calling it a clear PK. Not one.


Look at this video. Half time and France are up 2-1. Are they full of confidences and rolling? Or a little scared and on their heels? I’ve been in a lot of rooms in my life of footy. And this is a group that knew they were lucky as fcuk to be up 2-1 and playing scared. You saw it the first half. And this video stamps that solid. “Come on guys, be confident”



Croatia the better team that day. Bad calls give France the lead. Anyone think France deserved to be up at half?
France is a very strong and deep team. But on that day, two! Not one, but 2 massive gifts from the referee. Lucky guys.

Not a PK ever in a final.
Let them play. Let them battle and decide it on the pitch in open play. Try your hardest to not give a red or PK. Unless it’s so obvious you have to. That’s pretty much it.
 

dezza

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2005
3,859
2,200
Tokens
4,153
Dirty Money
420
Former England midfielder Chris Waddle on BBC Radio 5 live: "I think it is a penalty. I would have given it. Perisic has stopped the ball going through with his hand."

 

Yoda

Staff member
Lifetime Better Bastard
Jul 25, 2001
29,444
40,030
Tokens
55,166
Dirty Money
3,267
A66A8398-A702-4060-90A1-E088A1A3903B.jpeg

See @Dude not everyone has to agree with you! ;)

I appreciate @LION commentss, and i partially agree with what he has said, but the situation includes a lot of variables as well like, is it a good call in the final of the World Cup, maybe not, should it be overturned from original no call probably not, was it a hand ball that could and should be called anywhere else on the field? Damn rights.
To be honest I skimmed his article :)

Given the situation maybe you let it slide, but it was a hand ball. I’d bet there would be the same uproar if it wasn’t called and croatia won 2-1.

Let’s agree to disagree. Good?

Yours truly,
I’m right and you’re wrong.
 

Canucks4Ever

Well-Known Member
Jan 9, 2011
1,922
2,170
Tokens
3,832
Dirty Money
120
Sorry @LION but @SirM has put a moratorium on posts longer than 5 lines; I'm afraid your thoughts will have to be shared elsewhere...



Anyway...

Let them play. Let them battle and decide it on the pitch in open play. Try your hardest to not give a red or PK. Unless it’s so obvious you have to. That’s pretty much it.

Definitely agree with this and, I think, for the most part, top officials have the "game sense" that you are referring too.

Tough on the free kick goal, in real time I thought it was a foul. One look at a replay showed that there was no contact, but, from the angle the referee was at, it is easy to see how it was called. The Croatian defender is closing Greitzmann fast, everybody is anticipating contact and I don't think it was a total dive from Greitzmann. If you watch the replay you can see the turf kick out from under his right boot, clearly he has slipped, and, given that he was playing for/anticipating the contact from the defender, he is ready to be fouled and when his feet go out from under him he sells it like any other player would. What I am saying is that if there had have been a challenge it would have, in all likelihood, resulted in a foul and no one would have been too put off by Greitzmann making sure the ref noticed. Difference being is that it wasn't a foul, it was just misfortune which caused him to go down initially. Definitely tough on Croatia, but hard to indict the referee too much on that one IMO.

As for the PK; clearly it is up for debate, which is EXACTLY the situation we would be in without VAR. We are never going to come to a consensus on was it or wasn't it, so we can stop the debate whenever we feel like it. This was a controversial moment, similar to many that have come before it and many that will come after. The mistake is thinking that VAR is going to "fix" this. That's not it's purpose and it should not have been used in this instance. Yes, Croatia feel aggrieved, but had he called it a penalty in real time I am sure the Croatians would have surrounded the referee in a similar manner to that of the French, drawing little boxes with their hands and pleading for a review. Perhaps VAR would have intervened and they would have denied the French a penalty and we would still be having the same debate. Point is VAR is not for "review"; it is for "clear and obvious" mistakes, which this was not. Growing pains for VAR, absolutely, but IMO it did not ruin the game. This was going to be contentious no matter what.
 

LION

Lifetime Better Bastard
Mar 24, 2002
1,195
423
Tokens
1,826
Dirty Money
406
Sorry @LION but @SirM has put a moratorium on posts longer than 5 lines; I'm afraid your thoughts will have to be shared elsewhere...



Anyway...



Definitely agree with this and, I think, for the most part, top officials have the "game sense" that you are referring too.

Tough on the free kick goal, in real time I thought it was a foul. One look at a replay showed that there was no contact, but, from the angle the referee was at, it is easy to see how it was called. The Croatian defender is closing Greitzmann fast, everybody is anticipating contact and I don't think it was a total dive from Greitzmann. If you watch the replay you can see the turf kick out from under his right boot, clearly he has slipped, and, given that he was playing for/anticipating the contact from the defender, he is ready to be fouled and when his feet go out from under him he sells it like any other player would. What I am saying is that if there had have been a challenge it would have, in all likelihood, resulted in a foul and no one would have been too put off by Greitzmann making sure the ref noticed. Difference being is that it wasn't a foul, it was just misfortune which caused him to go down initially. Definitely tough on Croatia, but hard to indict the referee too much on that one IMO.

As for the PK; clearly it is up for debate, which is EXACTLY the situation we would be in without VAR. We are never going to come to a consensus on was it or wasn't it, so we can stop the debate whenever we feel like it. This was a controversial moment, similar to many that have come before it and many that will come after. The mistake is thinking that VAR is going to "fix" this. That's not it's purpose and it should not have been used in this instance. Yes, Croatia feel aggrieved, but had he called it a penalty in real time I am sure the Croatians would have surrounded the referee in a similar manner to that of the French, drawing little boxes with their hands and pleading for a review. Perhaps VAR would have intervened and they would have denied the French a penalty and we would still be having the same debate. Point is VAR is not for "review"; it is for "clear and obvious" mistakes, which this was not. Growing pains for VAR, absolutely, but IMO it did not ruin the game. This was going to be contentious no matter what.

Agreed on the Grieitzmann topic. I didn't want to get in to details on it. But saw it exact same, a little soft, but Grietzmann anticipated the foul coming and unplanted himself, which any smart striker does. To avoid injury primarily. But still a little soft as he mistimes it and unplants himself a little too early for my liking. Let one slide and its 1-0 France.

The fact that we are all debating if its a PK or not, is exactly why it can't be a PK in a WORLD CUP FINAL. In that situation, with that scoreline, in that moment in that match. No way Peresic blocked it with INTENT. I would agree it did clearly hit his hand, his eyes were even closed. But in that moment, that its even argued and debated to this degree, WORLD WIDE, is the reason it is not a PK.

You turned a 7% chance play in to a 86% chance with that call.

Was there a player behind Peresic to tap that in? to have a chance at goal?
Was the ball going in the net? or about to be redirected at net? what are those chances?
How you turn those answers in to PK is the nutty part. I would personally look at that in the Video before handing a goal to a team.
If that was a shot from the top of the box, and peresic blocks its way ON NET, then I would vote PK.
To me, its a bit like when a striker pushes the ball to far past a defender and off the endline, but gets fouled.... was he even going to get there if he didn't get fouled? Your going to give a PK for that when the ball was off the park as he went down?

Big matches, the whistle has to be put away a touch more. Unless its 100% clear. I repeat, the ref should not be the difference in a match, unless its 100000% clear.
The ref made a call to give a team a goal. That is tough, when it is APPARENT that its not 100% clearly a PK worldwide. Its all everyone is debating and talking about from that Game. That in itself is something no?
 

dezza

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2005
3,859
2,200
Tokens
4,153
Dirty Money
420
can you two please stop butchering the name Griezmann.

it's just like the mnemonic rule of thumb you learned in primary school: i before e and there's no fcuking t
 

Members online

Your TTP Wallet

Tokens
0
Dirty Money
0
TTP Dollars
$0
Top