Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
The "free kick" inside the box
- Thread starter bWize
- Start date
Wasn't deemed as serious infringement I presume.
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,286
Playing in a dangerous manner is an indirect free kick
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,539
Correct decision. He didn't foul Knockhaert - there was no contact. If there had been contact, he would've given a penalty.
Instead he gave an indirect free kick for dangerous play, the defender going in with his boot too high.
https://www.myactivesg.com/sports/f...ball-rules/indirect-free-kicks-in-penalty-box
Explained in more detail here.
Instead he gave an indirect free kick for dangerous play, the defender going in with his boot too high.
https://www.myactivesg.com/sports/f...ball-rules/indirect-free-kicks-in-penalty-box
Explained in more detail here.
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
Except ... Hughton says there was contact and Knockaert bled as a result.
martin tyler
Well-known member
- Jan 25, 2013
- 5,967
Which is why it should of been a penalty. Without contact indirect free kick. On the comentry I watched the ref and linesman told 4th official he couldn't be sure of the contact so gave the indirect free kick
Boroseagull
Well-known member
Watched it several times on replay from the feed I was watching, no contact was made. Stuart Pearce, joint commentating, said that word from the touchline was 'as the ref was unsure whether contact was actually made he gave an indirect free kick for dangerous play' 'If he was sure contact had been made it would have been a penalty'.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,539
I'll rephrase - because the referee judged that there wasn't contact, it was an indirect free kick. I was responding to the rules of the game aspect, not the specific incident. The referee upheld the correct rule under his opinion of the incident.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
https://twitter.com/BBCSussexSport/status/901480678793117696
[tweet]901480678793117696[/tweet]
https://twitter.com/AndyNaylorArgus/status/901479952318595074
[tweet]901479952318595074[/tweet]
Boroseagull
Well-known member
Can only go by what I, and the commentators saw. Watch it a few times from different angles and you will see AK rear back and hold his face.
Just goes to show that even when you play well, sometimes you need a bit of luck too!
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Hopefully, now we've used up our share of bad luck with today and two failed medicals.
Onwards and upwards.
No argument with that.
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
We also need a decent referee performance. We do seem to be suffering maybe its because we are the new boys but it seems every 50 50 decision goes against us. On more than one occasion today two identical incidents within seconds of each resulted in play on for Watford then free kick for Watford.
Yes. File under 'A little bit of luck.'
Yes, this, very unlucky today.
Thought the ref was poor.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ
Hove / Παρος
Why don't we ask [MENTION=35524]Knocky's Nose[/MENTION] to see if there was contact?
Seagull58
In the Algarve
It looked as though he caught Knocky's nose and chest. I can see why the ref thought he didn't make contact though.
Bollox decision he caught Knocky in the face