Major Refereeing Decisions

[theHotHead]

This clip doesn’t look like Ederson caught Odegaard, it looks like Odegaard steps on him.

Exactly what my brother said (Man U fan) during one of our heated arguments lol.

He said Odegaard steps on Edison's foot which from the camera angle shown above looks to be correct.

Jay there are 3 angles that show 2 conflicting aspects of this. The angle above shows Odegaard fouling Edison, another angle shows Edison getting the ball not the player and the third angle shows Edison going through Odegaard's foot to get the ball.

Clearly the video evidence is inconclusive so not awarding the penalty was the correct decision.

[theHotHead]

It does for me too. I meant it looks like Odegaard caught him first.

Yup, it looks like Ode stands directly on the incoming boot of Edison, which is a foul, it doesn't look like Edison fouls Ode .

[jayramfootball]

This clip doesn’t look like Ederson caught Odegaard, it looks like Odegaard steps on him.

Exactly what my brother said (Man U fan) during one of our heated arguments lol.

He said Odegaard steps on Edison's foot which from the camera angle shown above looks to be correct.

Jay there are 3 angles that show 2 conflicting aspects of this. The angle above shows Odegaard fouling Edison, another angle shows Edison getting the ball not the player and the third angle shows Edison going through Odegaard's foot to get the ball.

Clearly the video evidence is inconclusive so not awarding the penalty was the correct decision.

The angle above shows Edison kicking Odegard's foot before the ball, which is a penalty.

[Marsbar100]

Yup, hard to give it as a pen

[Ach]

Clearly not a clear and obvious error. Can understand why it wasn't overturned

[Salibatelli]

This clip doesn’t look like Ederson caught Odegaard, it looks like Odegaard steps on him.

Exactly what my brother said (Man U fan) during one of our heated arguments lol.

He said Odegaard steps on Edison's foot which from the camera angle shown above looks to be correct.

Jay there are 3 angles that show 2 conflicting aspects of this. The angle above shows Odegaard fouling Edison, another angle shows Edison getting the ball not the player and the third angle shows Edison going through Odegaard's foot to get the ball.

Clearly the video evidence is inconclusive so not awarding the penalty was the correct decision.

The angle above shows Edison kicking Odegard's foot before the ball, which is a penalty.

I don’t know what you’re looking at, it clearly shows Odegaard stepping on Ederson.

[Power n Glory]

That clip clearly shows odegaards foot clearly caught and changing direction BEFORE his foot lands.
Unless Odegaard has magic feet that can defy gravity his foot was moved by something else- I.e their goalkeeper’s boot.

Your argument is like saying if a player is brought down it’s not a penalty because his ankle ran into a defenders outstretched boot lunging for the ball which was nowhere near the ball

To me it looks like Edersons leg is there first and Odegaard steps on him and at the same time changes the trajectory of his foot, how can Ederson be deemed to have caught Odegaard when Odegaards foot arrives 2nd?

If Ederson doesn’t get the ball first it's still a foul. Same principle as if a player sticks his leg out and Ode runs into the leg. You can't attempt to make a challenge, miss the ball but make contact with the player in a goal scoring position and it not be a foul. We've seen players that have tried to con the ref a look for contact but Ode hasn't done that here. He's trying to control the ball.

If they have an angle and belive he Ederson won the ball first, then I get why a penalty wasn't given. But on this vid, that's a pen.

[Salibatelli]

This clip doesn’t look like Ederson caught Odegaard, it looks like Odegaard steps on him.

Exactly what my brother said (Man U fan) during one of our heated arguments lol.

He said Odegaard steps on Edison's foot which from the camera angle shown above looks to be correct.

Jay there are 3 angles that show 2 conflicting aspects of this. The angle above shows Odegaard fouling Edison, another angle shows Edison getting the ball not the player and the third angle shows Edison going through Odegaard's foot to get the ball.

Clearly the video evidence is inconclusive so not awarding the penalty was the correct decision.

Pretty much agree, no one can be sure if it isn’t or isn’t, even with VAR

[Salibatelli]

That clip clearly shows odegaards foot clearly caught and changing direction BEFORE his foot lands.
Unless Odegaard has magic feet that can defy gravity his foot was moved by something else- I.e their goalkeeper’s boot.

Your argument is like saying if a player is brought down it’s not a penalty because his ankle ran into a defenders outstretched boot lunging for the ball which was nowhere near the ball

To me it looks like Edersons leg is there first and Odegaard steps on him and at the same time changes the trajectory of his foot, how can Ederson be deemed to have caught Odegaard when Odegaards foot arrives 2nd?

If Ederson doesn’t get the ball first it's still a foul. Same principle as if a player sticks his leg out and Ode runs into the leg. You can't attempt to make a challenge, miss the ball but make contact with the player in a goal scoring position and it not be a foul. We've seen players that have tried to con the ref a look for contact but Ode hasn't done that here. He's trying to control the ball.

If they have an angle and belive he Ederson won the ball first, then I get why a penalty wasn't given. But on this vid, that's a pen.

If you look Ederson touches the ball as well, but also Odegaards foot changes the trajectory of Edersons foot as well.

I’m not sure that if you stick out your leg and the other player then steps on you it’s a clear cut foul to be honest.

Either way I don’t think this is clear cut and on that basis you can’t really give it.

[Power n Glory]

That clip clearly shows odegaards foot clearly caught and changing direction BEFORE his foot lands.
Unless Odegaard has magic feet that can defy gravity his foot was moved by something else- I.e their goalkeeper’s boot.

Your argument is like saying if a player is brought down it’s not a penalty because his ankle ran into a defenders outstretched boot lunging for the ball which was nowhere near the ball

To me it looks like Edersons leg is there first and Odegaard steps on him and at the same time changes the trajectory of his foot, how can Ederson be deemed to have caught Odegaard when Odegaards foot arrives 2nd?

If Ederson doesn’t get the ball first it's still a foul. Same principle as if a player sticks his leg out and Ode runs into the leg. You can't attempt to make a challenge, miss the ball but make contact with the player in a goal scoring position and it not be a foul. We've seen players that have tried to con the ref a look for contact but Ode hasn't done that here. He's trying to control the ball.

If they have an angle and belive he Ederson won the ball first, then I get why a penalty wasn't given. But on this vid, that's a pen.

If you look Ederson touches the ball as well, but also Odegaards foot changes the trajectory of Edersons foot as well.

I’m not sure that if you stick out your leg and the other player then steps on you it’s a clear cut foul to be honest.

Either way I don’t think this is clear cut and on that basis you can’t really give it.

I honestly can't see Ederson making contact with the ball in that clip.

So what's a late challenge? So if the goalie goes in for a slide tackle, totally misses the ball but the attacker knocks the ball behind the keeper, tries to hurdle over the keeper but clips the shoulder of the keeper because he's tried to jump, it's not a foul on the attacker?

[Salibatelli]

That clip clearly shows odegaards foot clearly caught and changing direction BEFORE his foot lands.
Unless Odegaard has magic feet that can defy gravity his foot was moved by something else- I.e their goalkeeper’s boot.

Your argument is like saying if a player is brought down it’s not a penalty because his ankle ran into a defenders outstretched boot lunging for the ball which was nowhere near the ball

To me it looks like Edersons leg is there first and Odegaard steps on him and at the same time changes the trajectory of his foot, how can Ederson be deemed to have caught Odegaard when Odegaards foot arrives 2nd?

If Ederson doesn’t get the ball first it's still a foul. Same principle as if a player sticks his leg out and Ode runs into the leg. You can't attempt to make a challenge, miss the ball but make contact with the player in a goal scoring position and it not be a foul. We've seen players that have tried to con the ref a look for contact but Ode hasn't done that here. He's trying to control the ball.

If they have an angle and belive he Ederson won the ball first, then I get why a penalty wasn't given. But on this vid, that's a pen.

If you look Ederson touches the ball as well, but also Odegaards foot changes the trajectory of Edersons foot as well.

I’m not sure that if you stick out your leg and the other player then steps on you it’s a clear cut foul to be honest.

Either way I don’t think this is clear cut and on that basis you can’t really give it.

I honestly can't see Ederson making contact with the ball in that clip.

So what's a late challenge? So if the goalie goes in for a slide tackle, totally misses the ball but the attacker knocks the ball behind the keeper, tries to hurdle over the keeper but clips the shoulder of the keeper because he's tried to jump, it's not a foul on the attacker?

It’s when his foot twists at the end.

I’d say a late challenge is one where you take the attackers leg when he’s already there, in this case Odegaard arrives after Ederson already has his foot there, you can’t call a foul for that or any player could step on a defender in a challenge and claim a foul.

This isn’t incident just isn’t clear enough to award a foul, there has to be no doubt and there definitely is here and that with replay after replay.

[Power n Glory]

That clip clearly shows odegaards foot clearly caught and changing direction BEFORE his foot lands.
Unless Odegaard has magic feet that can defy gravity his foot was moved by something else- I.e their goalkeeper’s boot.

Your argument is like saying if a player is brought down it’s not a penalty because his ankle ran into a defenders outstretched boot lunging for the ball which was nowhere near the ball

To me it looks like Edersons leg is there first and Odegaard steps on him and at the same time changes the trajectory of his foot, how can Ederson be deemed to have caught Odegaard when Odegaards foot arrives 2nd?

If Ederson doesn’t get the ball first it's still a foul. Same principle as if a player sticks his leg out and Ode runs into the leg. You can't attempt to make a challenge, miss the ball but make contact with the player in a goal scoring position and it not be a foul. We've seen players that have tried to con the ref a look for contact but Ode hasn't done that here. He's trying to control the ball.

If they have an angle and belive he Ederson won the ball first, then I get why a penalty wasn't given. But on this vid, that's a pen.

If you look Ederson touches the ball as well, but also Odegaards foot changes the trajectory of Edersons foot as well.

I’m not sure that if you stick out your leg and the other player then steps on you it’s a clear cut foul to be honest.

Either way I don’t think this is clear cut and on that basis you can’t really give it.

I honestly can't see Ederson making contact with the ball in that clip.

So what's a late challenge? So if the goalie goes in for a slide tackle, totally misses the ball but the attacker knocks the ball behind the keeper, tries to hurdle over the keeper but clips the shoulder of the keeper because he's tried to jump, it's not a foul on the attacker?

It’s when his foot twists at the end.

I’d say a late challenge is one where you take the attackers leg when he’s already there, in this case Odegaard arrives after Ederson already has his foot there, you can’t call a foul for that or any player could step on a defender in a challenge and claim a foul.

This isn’t incident just isn’t clear enough to award a foul, there has to be no doubt and there definitely is here and that with replay after replay.

Do you think Odegaard was trying to make contact with the player or ball first? You're redefining a foul on this one. Agree to disagree on this one.

[Salibatelli]

That clip clearly shows odegaards foot clearly caught and changing direction BEFORE his foot lands.
Unless Odegaard has magic feet that can defy gravity his foot was moved by something else- I.e their goalkeeper’s boot.

Your argument is like saying if a player is brought down it’s not a penalty because his ankle ran into a defenders outstretched boot lunging for the ball which was nowhere near the ball

To me it looks like Edersons leg is there first and Odegaard steps on him and at the same time changes the trajectory of his foot, how can Ederson be deemed to have caught Odegaard when Odegaards foot arrives 2nd?

If Ederson doesn’t get the ball first it's still a foul. Same principle as if a player sticks his leg out and Ode runs into the leg. You can't attempt to make a challenge, miss the ball but make contact with the player in a goal scoring position and it not be a foul. We've seen players that have tried to con the ref a look for contact but Ode hasn't done that here. He's trying to control the ball.

If they have an angle and belive he Ederson won the ball first, then I get why a penalty wasn't given. But on this vid, that's a pen.

If you look Ederson touches the ball as well, but also Odegaards foot changes the trajectory of Edersons foot as well.

I’m not sure that if you stick out your leg and the other player then steps on you it’s a clear cut foul to be honest.

Either way I don’t think this is clear cut and on that basis you can’t really give it.

I honestly can't see Ederson making contact with the ball in that clip.

So what's a late challenge? So if the goalie goes in for a slide tackle, totally misses the ball but the attacker knocks the ball behind the keeper, tries to hurdle over the keeper but clips the shoulder of the keeper because he's tried to jump, it's not a foul on the attacker?

It’s when his foot twists at the end.

I’d say a late challenge is one where you take the attackers leg when he’s already there, in this case Odegaard arrives after Ederson already has his foot there, you can’t call a foul for that or any player could step on a defender in a challenge and claim a foul.

This isn’t incident just isn’t clear enough to award a foul, there has to be no doubt and there definitely is here and that with replay after replay.

Do you think Odegaard was trying to make contact with the player or ball first? You're redefining a foul on this one. Agree to disagree on this one.

I think Odegaard was looking at the ball, the fact he stepped on Ederson was accidental.

Fair enough we can’t always agree, different people see things in different ways.

[Power n Glory]

That clip clearly shows odegaards foot clearly caught and changing direction BEFORE his foot lands.
Unless Odegaard has magic feet that can defy gravity his foot was moved by something else- I.e their goalkeeper’s boot.

Your argument is like saying if a player is brought down it’s not a penalty because his ankle ran into a defenders outstretched boot lunging for the ball which was nowhere near the ball

To me it looks like Edersons leg is there first and Odegaard steps on him and at the same time changes the trajectory of his foot, how can Ederson be deemed to have caught Odegaard when Odegaards foot arrives 2nd?

If Ederson doesn’t get the ball first it's still a foul. Same principle as if a player sticks his leg out and Ode runs into the leg. You can't attempt to make a challenge, miss the ball but make contact with the player in a goal scoring position and it not be a foul. We've seen players that have tried to con the ref a look for contact but Ode hasn't done that here. He's trying to control the ball.

If they have an angle and belive he Ederson won the ball first, then I get why a penalty wasn't given. But on this vid, that's a pen.

If you look Ederson touches the ball as well, but also Odegaards foot changes the trajectory of Edersons foot as well.

I’m not sure that if you stick out your leg and the other player then steps on you it’s a clear cut foul to be honest.

Either way I don’t think this is clear cut and on that basis you can’t really give it.

I honestly can't see Ederson making contact with the ball in that clip.

So what's a late challenge? So if the goalie goes in for a slide tackle, totally misses the ball but the attacker knocks the ball behind the keeper, tries to hurdle over the keeper but clips the shoulder of the keeper because he's tried to jump, it's not a foul on the attacker?

It’s when his foot twists at the end.

I’d say a late challenge is one where you take the attackers leg when he’s already there, in this case Odegaard arrives after Ederson already has his foot there, you can’t call a foul for that or any player could step on a defender in a challenge and claim a foul.

This isn’t incident just isn’t clear enough to award a foul, there has to be no doubt and there definitely is here and that with replay after replay.

Do you think Odegaard was trying to make contact with the player or ball first? You're redefining a foul on this one. Agree to disagree on this one.

I think Odegaard was looking at the ball, the fact he stepped on Ederson was accidental.

Fair enough we can’t always agree, different people see things in different ways.

Yeah, fair enough. More can be done on making the rules clear when it comes to ref standards.

[Salibatelli]

I agree the rules need to be simplified, I feel the rules are too complicated now.

I also think it would help if you could hear the ref in football like you can in other sports like rugby, it would clear up why certain decisions were made.

It seems to me that in other sports refs also get more respect with people not questioning their decisions so much.