I’ve enjoyed the discussion as well! I also hear more WC discussions than usual since it’s in the US, and that’s been welcome.
Meanwhile: a lot of people are voicing their disgust at Argentina’s shithousery, which feels a little late to the party. But I think large parts of the US were tuned in to see the great Messi, and didn’t realize that he comes with a hellish carnival.
On top of that, the very-long-running CR7 vs Lionel discussion (which IMO has been dead a long time, but people persist), plus a dislike of stars in general, has added to people pointing their fingers with schadenfreude (especially after he tried to get Cucurella carded).
He’s the greatest striker in history, but he does come with baggae.
That’s pretty hard to reconcile with the video that shows the defender already throwing one leg into the air before any contact, then collapsing at the slight contact from the attacker playing the ball, then grabbing the shin of the leg that was never touched and yelping in pain. An egregious defensive flop. If the defender had just bodied up and, you know, played defense, he could have prevented the situation and the other defender wouldn’t have had to leave the other attacker unmarked. As I said above, shameful refereeing.
That doesn’t make it better, though the Argentina team are masters at exploiting referee weaknesses.
At the 44 second mark of the video, you can see Mikel Merino standing on the foot of the defender, which makes him pull out and go down like he’s been shot (I think they teach this reaction starting at the youth level in some countries). That’s the foul. If this is what the referee called, he’s very good. I’m not being snarky about it, I’m saying that only a very good referee would see what the feet are doing in that instant when most people - and most referees - are watching what the bodies and hands are doing.
And by the by, does anybody else think that Nico Williams Jr. looks an awful lot like Chris Rock?
Had that prevented the defender from actually defending in any way, I might agree, but the defender was already in the process of throwing himself down at that point. To clutch his right leg. That was never touched.
And again I will say that not every coming together of players that results in contact should be a foul. Especially when one of the players isn’t even attempting to play the game.
One thing that I think would help is if there was a way to penalize egregious fouls that don’t rise to the level of a card. For instance, a simple foul would be a kick from the spot of the foul. An egregious foul would move the ball 10 meters forward. A serious, intentional foul would be a card. This would allow a way for the refs to gain control of a excessively physical game without having to resort to cards. If a player wants to throw the ball handler to the ground, it comes with the risk of moving the ball 10 meters forward. This could also be used for delay tactics, like when the ball goes out and the defensive team holds onto the ball so the offensive team can’t throw it in right away. Do something like that, the throw in moves 10 meters forward. Add some kind of non-card penalty so that the bad behavior comes with a disadvantage that makes it not as worth it.
Seconded and thirded! Special thanks to @Frodo and @EinsteinsHund and everybody else who knows the game much better than us uneducated Americans. I watched far more WC games than ever before, and this thread helped keep my interest.
IIRC, the idea of moving the ball as a form of punishment has been floated (and discarded) in the past. I’m not convinced either way, but I think it’s worth IFAB discussing it again. I think the original thought was to punish defenders encroaching within 10 yards of a free kick as a means to delay that restart. Defenders lingering on or in front of the ball to delay the restart? Referee picks up the ball, marches X yards closer to goal, puts it down, and blows the whistle. Rinse and repeat as necessary. I don’t think it’s been tried at any level, though.
They also went into that tournament as defending champions and lost 1-0 in the final. That time to West Germany. They didn’t have their best team out to start because of suspensions and finished the game with 9 men after two red cards. The goal was a penalty, Maradona blamed the referee.
Well… if in the area, it’s a penalty anyway; if outside the area, the offended team should be able to move the ball into the area, which would be an intriguing wrinkle - free kicks from where there have never been free kicks before!
Of course, if the foul happens outside the box but in the arc above the penalty area, then moving the ball ten (let’s say yards here) forward would move it closer to the goal than the penalty spot, but with the defense allowed to put a wall on the goal line, so harder to score on than a penalty. It would put the “bend over the wall” specialists at a premium.
Another possibility would be to make it optional, or more flexibility - allow the offended side to put the ball anywhere within ten yards of the spot of the foul - forward, to the side, where ever they want.
Of course, this puts more judgment in the hands of the ref, which seems to be the reverse of the trend.
Another idea would be to do like hockey and take the aggressive player off the field for a minute or so. There’s lots of ways to handle the situation. They need to give the refs some additional tools to manage the game between a kick from the spot of the foul and a card.
When is the last time you saw an indirect free kick inside the box for attackers at the professional level? In theory, they are allowed. In practice, at some point referees seem to have decided that only direct free kicks resulting in penalties will be called there.
