A&H

Arsenal vs Chelsea - Community Shield

Status
Not open for further replies.
Padfoot

Padfoot

The Persecuted One
Around 42 minute mark....David Luiz under pressure from Welbeck, flicks ball into the air with his foot, then heads it back to Chelsea's GK......from about the six yard line.....

For me, that's a deliberate trick to pass it back to the keeper......nothing was given, obviously, and the commentary team were full of praise for Luiz's quick thinking.

Anyone else inclined to give the IDFK?
 
The Referee Store
Good grief

Didn't for a second consider it but now that you mention it, has to be. Brilliant bit of skill but you're right, he's flicked up a ball on the floor and headed it back to the keeper

Penalty decision?? For me that's a pen, bellerin clips his heel
 
Didn't know they got dressed and stood around with the 4th. Learn something every day.
 
For me, that is not a deliberate trick to circumvent the law. Luiz has not simply carried out and flick and header to get around passing the ball to the GK, he has flicked the ball up to play over the attacker then used the opportunity afforded by his skill to safely head the ball to the GK.
 
ASM said:
For me, that is not a deliberate trick to circumvent the law. Luiz has not simply carried out and flick and header to get around passing the ball to the GK, he has flicked the ball up to play over the attacker then used the opportunity afforded by his skill to safely head the ball to the GK.
Click to expand...

Completely agree, penalise that any everyone is talking about the referee. Luiz has tried to lift it over Welbeck so that he can then take possession of the ball, just he has made a total mess of it, the ball has gone straight up in the air, so he has then headed it back.

The circumvention clause was brought in to stop defenders getting around the new back pass law by flicking up a ball that was stationary on the floor so that they could head it back to the keeper. That didn't happen here by any stretch of the imagination.

Stop looking for problems folks, refereeing is difficult enough as it is without making extra problems for yourselves.
 
RustyRef said:
Completely agree, penalise that any everyone is talking about the referee. Luiz has tried to lift it over Welbeck so that he can then take possession of the ball, just he has made a total mess of it, the ball has gone straight up in the air, so he has then headed it back.

The circumvention clause was brought in to stop defenders getting around the new back pass law by flicking up a ball that was stationary on the floor so that they could head it back to the keeper. That didn't happen here by any stretch of the imagination.

Stop looking for problems folks, refereeing is difficult enough as it is without making extra problems for yourselves.
Click to expand...

A lot of sense in your post apart from the "that was stationary on the floor" which has nothing to do with it.

I can't see the vid posted here and cant find anywhere else either. But from the descriptions it sounds like the correct decision was made.

This is similar to when a defender passes the ball back to another defender. The second defender chooses to leave it and the goal keeper picks it up. You have to judge the intent.

As far as David Luiz, this is the same player who picked up the magic spray with his hand and placed it somewhere else to get a better angle in a free kick so you never know what his intent is. I would at least have a quiet word with him on the run to make sure it doesn't happen again.
 
Oh dear....must have some Chelsea fans on here....or even more unlikely....some Bobby Madeley ones......

Such a shame that people are too scared to give what is a fairly easy clear cut case of circumvention for fear of "making life difficult". Wasn't aware that we went out to make things easy on ourselves.....thought we there to do a job?

The circumvention clause was designed to stop players using any sort of trickery to facilitate a pass back to the GK.......and this gem from Luiz certainly qualifies. From the moment the ball left his boot, he was clearly intending to head back to the GK......his eyes never leave the flight of the ball and the header is made with a clearly deliberate backward motion towards the GK. IF he had intended to head it out and it was a mistimed or misdirected header....I'd absolutely agree with you....however that isn't what happened.
 
I would hope that "his eyes never leave the flight of the ball..." - that has nothing to do with his intent, that's just playing the game.

Personally I believe he over cooked the kick and the ball was in the air for much longer than he intended, just necessitating/facilitating the head back to the keeper.

I think he intended a much more delicate dink, which would have had the ball back on the deck before the Arsenal player could turn, allowing him to play the ball out from the back in the ample space that would open up for him on the right hand side.
 
Before this drags on incessantly, that's fine @Padfoot you penalise if you like that's your call.

Most of the rest of the world however will simply move on to something that actually matters
 
I think you have to penalise Luiz here.
He has deliberately played the ball (the interwebs is salivating over what great skill it was), and then he has headed it back.
IMHO the law exists to stop this. The law exists to force Luiz into a clearance of some kind, and not enable the security of a header back to the GK.
"Trick" is not great terminology as it is not really explained (it is only used for this offence and as part of the definition of "deceiving" the referee in the terms section). He has certainly tricked Wellbeck here. Was the trick "designed" to facilitate a back header when he first flicked it up - I am not so sure we can judge that, or whether it matters. Having played the ball with control, Luiz should not be heading the ball back to the GK here.

I think Luiz has utterly shafted Courtois here as it should be an IDFK whether or not the GK picks it up or not, and a YC for Luiz.
 
I have to agree with @Padfoot. This should have been penalised. I think it meets the criteria for a deliberate trick and the outcome is exactly shat the law seeks to outlaw.
 
ASM said:
Before this drags on incessantly, that's fine @Padfoot you penalise if you like that's your call.

Most of the rest of the world however will simply move on to something that actually matters
Click to expand...

And this is the cancer that is destroying the integrity of refereeing.......the idea that certain aspects of the LOTG no longer matter because they are not "popular" or would cause a referee to have to make a difficult decision.

And it also nicely illustrates the way in which referees have to sell their integrity to clamber up to the top of the pyramid.......because one tough decision like this could wreck their season in terms of marks and see them plummeting back down the greasy shaft.
It becomes more about self preservation than applying the LOTG.
 
And there we go, the set is complete with questioning the integrity of someone who disagrees with you, knew it wouldn't take long.

I've already explained above why I don't feel it merits penalising - nothing to do with popularity - simply for me it doesn't meet the criteria.

If Luiz had wanted he couldn't have used his knee to play the ball to the GK instead of kicking it up in the air and the ball couldn't have been subsequently handled so to suggest this was some form of elaborate form of trickery designed to circumvent law just doesn't sit right with me.

I would happily penalise the offence where it has clearly occurred, think Veratti last season, but this isn't one of those occasions for me.
 
I think the focus in this thread is on "deliberate trick" rather that "to circumvent the laws...". No doubt that Luiz 'trick' was deliberate but having made it realised an opportunity (shout perhaps) to head to Courtois. His initial action was a defensive play to defeat the attacker not to circumvent the pass back law. Therefore legal in my opinion.
 
Yeah, I think @MentalFrix has phrased it excellently above - the intent of that flick is clearly to try and get it past the attacker, the decision to head it back to the keeper is a reaction to the fact the first flick didn't get it away far enough.
 
MentalFrix said:
I think the focus in this thread is on "deliberate trick" rather that "to circumvent the laws...". No doubt that Luiz 'trick' was deliberate but having made it realised an opportunity (shout perhaps) to head to Courtois. His initial action was a defensive play to defeat the attacker not to circumvent the pass back law. Therefore legal in my opinion.
Click to expand...

+1

Luiz has taken advantage of his own poor, not intentional first touch
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top