AS Monaco (A) | CL | Post Match Thread

Dax777 said:
A raised boot " even without contact" is a foul. And can be called by a ref.
Click to expand...
You must be angered by the refereeing in the Bournemouth/Fulham match. I counted 82 raised boots without contact in the first half and not a single one was deemed a foul. Oh, is that because ultimately it’s a discretionary call by the referee? Then instead of arguing what is or is not a foul by the book, we should be discussing the discretion of the referee and VAR in the case of Monaco, which is what all of us who think VAR made a bad call ARE arguing.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
You must be angered by the refereeing in the Bournemouth/Fulham match. I counted 82 raised boots without contact in the first half and not a single one was deemed a foul. Oh, is that because ultimately it’s a discretionary call by the referee? Then instead of arguing what is or is not a foul by the book, we should be discussing the discretion of the referee and VAR in the case of Monaco, which is what all of us who think VAR made a bad call ARE arguing.
Click to expand...
I didn't watch that game. 82? Was it a Kung fu Soccer match?

Well, we did discuss it. The 'foul' tangent was simply coz Paladin was hell bent on redefining what constituted a foul.

In my view, the ref almost certainly saw the high boot... My reaction in real time was to suck on my teeth...it looked like a foul.

The ref, observing (the discretion you highlighted and considering the time and place) he almost certainly chose not to call the high kick. But the moment Dier started acting like someone had shot him in the eye with a pellet gun, it was obvious VAR would check. As they should.

They checked and concluded there was contact. Which is a penalty offense.


When you say VAR made a bad call, what exactly do you mean?

Is it that you didn't see contact?

You think a potential penalty should not have been reviewable by VAR?

You think Dier hit Nico's foot with his head and thus is not a foul?

You think the ref is bent?

You don't give a shit about the rules. Its never a penalty because you've seen similar not given?


These are some of the general arguments others have proposed. Granted, I don't remember reading yours in particular..

FWIW, None of the above arguments are particularly convincing.

What did you find that convinced you it was a wrong decision?
 
Now that it's been 2 days and I've calmed down..

5 things we learned:

1. Erling has become the leader of the team!

2. Nico is a brilliant understudy to Rodri

3. Defense/ Midfield looks slow on the counter without Khusanov

4. We still have issues in the CL with French teams and Spanish refs

5. We're crap at free kicks/ corners. Foden usually takes them but at best he's below average. WE NEED A SPECIALIST!
 
Blue_Lightsaber said:
5. We're crap at free kicks/ corners. Foden usually takes them but at best he's below average. WE NEED A SPECIALIST!
Click to expand...

I was the more struck by that in that recently I watched the women in a full match. Nearly all the corners were good. Hung high into the box, not to any particular player, but uncomfortable for the defence. The opposition — same level of quality. Now I know that we sometimes choose to put them deliberately on the floor, with the men. That is a strategy that rarely works, as far as I can see.
 
noseve said:
True - that Jack/Spurs one still annoys me!
Click to expand...

There are an awful lot of decisions in games against that lot over the years that still annoy me. Kyle pushed over Raheem — it was as clear as day — in the area, when he still played for Spurs. Raheem had left him for dead, Kyle didn't even pretend to try to play the ball. Play waved on by the ref.
I could go on and on…
 
Dax777 said:
Ah! i see you have spotted your own error and tried to hide it in the rewrite. :)
A 'foul' is an offense that can lead to a free kick. Both direct or indirect.

A raised boot " even without contact" is a foul. And can be called by a ref. Like i have said.

If you weren't referencing the game, then there is no confusion.
Click to expand...
Ok pal, you have been shouting this raised boot is a foul since it happened. What about Haaland’s greatest goal for us? Goal or foul? He has scored a few like this as well.

IMG_3941.webp
 
Marvin. said:
In the bigger picture a draw away at Monaco is a disappointing result because in the new CL format,a win at home and a draw away is a perilous outcome. A win at home and a draw away would in the seeded Group stages be enough for qualification. City would set up to neutralise transition away from home, and nick wins or typically draw. That's no longer good enough. To qualify automatically you need to win some away games and Monaco away was probably our easiest away fixture.

We need to change our low-risk tactics away from home in the CL
Click to expand...
i just wanted to ask you do you consider the basic high risk tactic is to defend/ Park bus and hold onto the lead? If so then we should have employed this high risk in the last 7 -10 minutes of this CL game. I think we were too naive in the last 10 mins. Why not shut up shop? It is a big risk but at most all that might have happened was that they would have scored and got the draw? Same outcome.
 
It is quite clear the ref had a agenda against City, personally i think it is Pep, but you can not complain about probable, the high boot is given often, even though the foot is going away from the player, and it is the other player that instigates contact. But that is all Ref`s opinion, where City should complain, and then attach other occurrences, is the first half. which contained a serious injury, a substitution and 3 goals, but only 1 minute of extra time, which would not be a problem, but for the booking for time wasting, time wasting that the ref never warned the player about, nor did he warn the other keeper, who had taken longer
 
salfordbluetrue said:
It is quite clear the ref had a agenda against City, personally i think it is Pep, but you can not complain about probable, the high boot is given often, even though the foot is going away from the player, and it is the other player that instigates contact. But that is all Ref`s opinion, where City should complain, and then attach other occurrences, is the first half. which contained a serious injury, a substitution and 3 goals, but only 1 minute of extra time, which would not be a problem, but for the booking for time wasting, time wasting that the ref never warned the player about, nor did he warn the other keeper, who had taken longer
Click to expand...
see the problem is when you put teams to bed with clinical finishing like we used to do, gripes like these never become a topic. Thinking back I remember laughing when Nani was red carded for a high boot in the CL. So the motto is don't be doing kung fu kicks if there's an opponents head in the vicinity.
 
Ken92 said:
having an eye on ligue 1 atm ,can´t understand how we drew with this garbage...
Click to expand...
hard to understand as they are 5th in the league, 3pts off top, Ansu Fati on some form. They are a strong team, UCL night at home, they aint mugs.

Thats being said we have been miles better and again especially first half. We still getting up to the speed in terms of fitness, its quite clear. Now we have a good opportunity to get it done, welcome players whose just got back and we are ready to go.

Pretty sure Monaco wont be that much crucial outcome at the end of the day and its been very unlucky anyway.
 
BolinCell said:
see the problem is when you put teams to bed with clinical finishing like we used to do, gripes like these never become a topic. Thinking back I remember laughing when Nani was red carded for a high boot in the CL. So the motto is don't be doing kung fu kicks if there's an opponents head in the vicinity.
Click to expand...
Agree with your points, but, and it does not change that it was a penalty, his foot is not in the vicinity, Dier comes from behind Nico, his foot is still there after he makes contact with the ball, Dier dives for the ball after it has gone and makes contact with Nico`s shin, the ref went through the motions, he did not ask who made contact with who. Still the ref got it right if you do not take the full picture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top