FA Cup

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,012
It's probably not a proper reaction but now I'm nauseous.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
29,064
AZ
The timing could have been much worse I guess so at least there is a little time off coming anyway, They weren’t beating Bayern.
 

dirtynine

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 17, 2002
5,271
Philly
Not watching, how bad did the injury look? Like “lost season” bad, or “6-8 weeks” bad?

(I don’t care much about Chelsea’s fortunes but ideally he’d be healthy for fall Concacaf matches.)
 

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,012
Agree timing could have been much worse but gutted that he gets injuring coming off his best run of form.

Not watching, how bad did the injury look? Like “lost season” bad, or “6-8 weeks” bad?
He went down clutching his hamstring and banging the ground. I really don't know what the timetable would be. But fully non-contact.
 

dirtynine

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 17, 2002
5,271
Philly
Agree timing could have been much worse but gutted that he gets injuring coming off his best run of form.



He went down clutching his hamstring and banging the ground. I really don't know what the timetable would be. But fully non-contact.
Thanks. Crap. Hoping some of that banging is an expression of frustration and not pure pain.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
12,435
Just pure class by PEA. Perhaps should have been called back for a foul?
 

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,012
Well that was not good defending but props to Auba stayed composed.
 

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,012
I really don't think he deserved to see red there to be honest.
 

Jimy Hendrix

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 15, 2002
3,448
If I was a Chelsea fan (an upsetting clause to be sure), I would be pissed at this reffing. Arsenal is getting away with a lot in the middle of the pitch.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
29,064
AZ
Just a rotten second yellow. Maybe I am bummed because it effectively ends a good game but it seemed soft.
 

cromulence

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2009
4,532
By the way, it's pretty bad for Hudson-Odoi that Pedro was the choice over him, and now Barkley.

Oh never mind, there he is.
 

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,012
Throw everything at the wall. CHO and Tammy on.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
12,435
Not looking forward for Tottenham to be flying to Kazakhstan next season.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
29,064
AZ
That’s it for David Luiz. In fairness, he was massive in these two games in Wembley despite looking off form in the last few weeks of league games.
 

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,012
Wow Pedro in pain now after landing in a tangled pile. Bringing out the stretcher.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
13,042
Pittsburgh, PA
Just finished watching on tape delay. I went into it wanting to see Pulisic score and play well, and an Arsenal win to get them to Europe. So this is pretty solid in my eyes.

- The second yellow on Kovacic was bullshit. He got the ball, and barely touched Xhaka. They need a coaches' VAR challenge or something (maybe what you risk is a substitution). The reffing felt pretty one-sided, even though I preferred the result.
- Agree with the non-red for Azpilicueta. Was an attempt to play the ball, there was a covering defender by the time the contact continued into the box, etc.
- PEA is such a killer. Funding his own raise, indeed. Doesn't get a lot smoother than that second one.
- I can't believe Lampard didn't put in Kante.
- Chelsea was able to hold the ball while down a man pretty impressively, and snuff out the inevitable breakaway counterattacks
- Rudiger and Zouma held up pretty well, but when tested by top forwards, the entire defense felt really flimsy and only barely in-control, and not just on the deciding attack.

"In response to the loss, Lampard announced that he was buying Neymar, Luka Modric and Lewandowski."
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
17,700
Philadelphia
- Agree with the non-red for Azpilicueta. Was an attempt to play the ball, there was a covering defender by the time the contact continued into the box, etc.
Where exactly in this sequence is he attempting to play the ball?

It is also pretty clear if you pause that tape around six seconds that the other defender was behind the play and could not have disrupted the chance if the foul hadn't occurred.

I think you can make an argument that it shouldn't have been a penalty (which depends on whether one is focused on where the foul begins or ends and the rules are not really clear on that point). But by the letter of the law it is a stone cold red: Foul intentionally committed to deny a clear goal scoring opportunity.

All good because we won though!
 
Last edited:

67YAZ

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2000
2,463
Congrats to Arsenal! I remember when folks around here complaining that Auba was a "speed merchant" who wouldn't age well.
 
FWIW, I'm just watching the highlights on BBC's "Match of the Day" program, and they showed a replay of the potential handball-outside-the-box on Martinez late in the match...and it wasn't outside the box. Martinez clearly caught the ball right on the line.

(Thrilled with the result, obviously!)
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
29,064
AZ
Where exactly in this sequence is he attempting to play the ball?

It is also pretty clear if you pause that tape around six seconds that the other defender was behind the play and could not have disrupted the chance if the foul hadn't occurred.

I think you can make an argument that it shouldn't have been a penalty (which depends on whether one is focused on where the foul begins or ends and the rules are not really clear on that point). But by the letter of the law it is a stone cold red: Foul intentionally committed to deny a clear goal scoring opportunity.

All good because we won though!
Not playing the ball is not really one of the FIFA or FA criteria for DOGSO though. The most important criteria is usually whether the player was clear and within the frame of the goal or a few feet out (for non handling DOGSO). It really is supposed to be the equivalent of handling a goal ward ball. The idea is to not pile up the consequences for one foul given that a caution and a spot kick is already a very significant penalty for one act of non violent conduct. One way to think about DOGSO is to ask, if the keeper saves the penalty will the fouled team have been very hard done by? If so, show red to ensure the punishment fits the crime even if the penalty is missed.

Anyway, here are the four FA criteria. I have at least three as not supporting DOGSO.

The following must be considered:
  • distance between the offence and the goal
  • general direction of the play
  • likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
  • location and number of defenders
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
17,700
Philadelphia
Not playing the ball is not really one of the FIFA or FA criteria for DOGSO though. The most important criteria is usually whether the player was clear and within the frame of the goal or a few feet out (for non handling DOGSO). It really is supposed to be the equivalent of handling a goal ward ball. The idea is to not pile up the consequences for one foul given that a caution and a spot kick is already a very significant penalty for one act of non violent conduct. One way to think about DOGSO is to ask, if the keeper saves the penalty will the fouled team have been very hard done by? If so, show red to ensure the punishment fits the crime even if the penalty is missed.

Anyway, here are the four FA criteria. I have at least three as not supporting DOGSO.

The following must be considered:
  • distance between the offence and the goal
  • general direction of the play
  • likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
  • location and number of defenders
Not playing the ball is critical because FIFA has clarified that unintentional fouls committed that deny a CGSO should not see red. This was clearly an intentional foul and we know that because he didn’t try to play the ball, just to impede the player.

Was it a CGSO? Aubameyang is in the box and one on one with the keeper if there is no foul. He’s got control of the ball, near the goal, at a dangerous angle, with no other defender that can trouble a shot. I don’t see how that doesnt fit the criteria.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,319
Chelmsford, MA
In my view he’s grabbing at him and it’s certainly worth a penalty but anything more is too severe. I tend to be a Neanderthal on these things so you could even talk me out of a penalty but I just don’t think you can convince me that what I saw should result in Chelsea down to 10 men. It’s not cynical, it’s desperate. He may not be playing the ball but he’s not hacking him down or trying to injure him more trying to compete physically to get back in the play
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
17,700
Philadelphia
In my view he’s grabbing at him and it’s certainly worth a penalty but anything more is too severe. I tend to be a Neanderthal on these things so you could even talk me out of a penalty but I just don’t think you can convince me that what I saw should result in Chelsea down to 10 men. It’s not cynical, it’s desperate. He may not be playing the ball but he’s not hacking him down or trying to injure him more trying to compete physically to get back in the play
I actually agree in general that I hate this rule and its tendency to ruin big matches or cup ties. Arsenal have been on the other end of this many times, most notably in the 2006 CL final. I’m just saying that by the letter of the rule it’s a CGSO and a red and I’ve seen this kind of situation given red many times.

But it’s all academic in the end given the result.
 

tmracht

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,012
Given how he screamed before he even went down, I was fairly sure he'd torn something. A strain seems like best case scenario tbh.
Yeah his anguish before he even tried to shoot then the collapse on the follow through had me convinced his hamstring was in shambles. I'd take a strain as best case.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
13,042
Pittsburgh, PA
That hamstring died a hero. Or almost did, anyway - the shot went wide. In the movies, that's a cup-winning score in the 88th minute.