should "entertaining" players be protected

bigstar

seen fergie saying he was happy with last nights ref protecting ronaldo. i remember benitez saying the same thing about torres last year. is it right to give these types of players an advantage and penalise more physical players. i think its an important part of football to be physical. good tackles are as much a part of the game as good skill. i think this "protection" encourages diving too and also encourages refs to give frees for dives. the game is rife with diving just look at the dynamo kiev player last night, disgraceful stuff

Boggles

bigstar wrote: »

is it right to give these types of players an advantage and penalise more physical players.

The advantage of what? Being able to walk?

Most of the Rules of the game are clearly stated, Refs have to and must follow them while applying common sense.

Mitch Connor

bigstar wrote: »

seen fergie saying he was happy with last nights ref protecting ronaldo. i remember benitez saying the same thing about torres last year. is it right to give these types of players an advantage and penalise more physical players. i think its an important part of football to be physical. good tackles are as much a part of the game as good skill. i think this "protection" encourages diving too and also encourages refs to give frees for dives. the game is rife with diving just look at the dynamo kiev player last night, disgraceful stuff

In my opinion, the 'protected' phrase is misused by some people. Players like Ronaldo and Torres love to run at players and take people on. This results in more tackles getting put in on them than on a player like Fabregas, or Scholes. In some games, it appears that the ref lets tackles on players like Ronaldo and Torres go without a card while they would card a similar tackle on another player, because Ronaldo and Torres will probably get fouled the same way another 10 times in the game. The refs are hesitant to book the fouling player cause there is a higher chance of them getting sent off for two yellows. I don't think it is extra protection that is being looked for, just not the allowance of 15 fouls on them without a card, which encourages defenders to keep going in strong.

jesus_thats_gre

The rules that exist should be consistently enforced. No priority should be given to any type of player.

I can see why you would suggest that something should be done though. Saying that, I think the more flamboyant players create their own problems with constant diving and play acting.

Maybe if they stopped faining injury, the referee wouldn't automatically have doubts as to the severify of challenges.

bigstar

Boggles wrote: »

The advantage of what? Being able to walk?

Most of the Rules of the game are clearly stated, Refs have to and must follow them while applying common sense.

the advantage of already having the skill to beat players while also getting frees for the slightest knock. a bad tackle is a bad tackle and deserves a free and card if its that bad but protecting one group of players at the expense of anther is not common sense in my opinion.

bigstar

i agree about them faining injury. i dont think rolling around will help any injury. and usually when a player is seriously injured they rarely roll around they just lie still. but instead of this being criticised managers want more "protection". maybe managers are worried about players injurying themselves rolling on the ground so they dont want them tackled in the first place.

anonymous_joe

Ronaldo is always going to get tackled more during a game than average.

Some of these tackles will inevitably be rough and quite possibly foul.

If people got booked for tackles no matter who they tackled, you would inevitably see more red cards. Given that this would encourage defenders improve the technique of their tackling I'm not sure that's a bad thing really.

redout

Why exactly do they deserve to be protected ? They are no different to the other players on the pitch in the eyes of the law (FA). If you constantly try to nutmeg a guy throughout a match he is going to heavy tackle you sooner or later. Why ? It is human nature that everyone has their limit as regards been made look a fool. Ronaldo looks for fouls as it is part of his game, especially around the box he knows 9/10 the defender will try make a heavy tackle and he will win a free-kick thus giving himself a goalscoring opportunity. In one way it is giving oneself an advantage but on ther hand you could get injured. I dont criticise Ronaldo for this as it is a compliment to his ability.

LuckyLloyd

I'm sure refs strive to apply the laws of the game in the most consistent manner possible. But, like everything else in life, some of them are just more competent at their job than others. Therefore it can appear at times to observers that some refs are making it more of a priority to clamp down on "physical" players. When, infact, the difference is entirely due to the varying levels of abillity with which referees can analyze the game they are in charge of.

Statements like this from a manager are nothing more than noise. The officiating crew from last night's game will be assessed and graded by a set of criteria that exists entirely independent from punditry or post game interviews. Ferguson's comments are irrelevant and are probably completely ignored by UEFA, and will have zero bearing on how that crew ref their next game - or how games are reffed generally in this year's CL.

I have stopped paying attention to interviews with managers before or after games. They are a waste of time.

Fratton Fred

I don't think it is about protecting flair players but more to do with penalising consistant fouling.

If a player constantly commits a foul then he should get booked, but no defender is going to say "Oh look, that guys a bit good, I'll let him play fancy football around me to make the game more attractive".

I don't think fergie can get too excited though, if you watch Vidic, he is one of the dirtiest players in the league, but he seems to get away with a lot.

Mitch Connor

redout wrote: »

Why exactly do they deserve to be protected ? They are no different to the other players on the pitch in the eyes of the law (FA). If you constantly try to nutmeg a guy throughout a match he is going to heavy tackle you sooner or later. Why ? It is human nature that everyone has their limit as regards been made look a fool. Ronaldo looks for fouls as it is part of his game, especially around the box he knows 9/10 the defender will try make a heavy tackle and he will win a free-kick thus giving himself a goalscoring opportunity. In one way it is giving oneself an advantage but on ther hand you could get injured. I dont criticise Ronaldo for this as it is a compliment to his ability.

Ronaldo could nutmeg the guy 20 times, a bad tackle is still a bad tackle no matter how much he has humiliated the guy, and 'should' be delt with by the ref in the same manner as any other bad tackle. Just because Ronaldo(or Torres, or Robinho, or Walcott) has the ability to get the ball past a defending player regularly, does not mean they should just put up with heavey tackles. You can tackle hard, and fair, no issue with that. But a yellow card tackle should be a yellow card tackle regardless of who is being tackle, they are the laws. I don't think fergie, or any manager asking for 'protection' wants yellow cards given out for tackles undeserving of such a punishment just to 'protect' the player, but they DO want defenders to know they can't go in heavey and late, and get away with it (in terms of getting a card) simply because it is Ronaldo (or Torres, Robinho etc). Equally, you will see teams systematically foul players to keep them out of the game, professionally cynical fouls should also be yellowed, imo.

Mitch Connor

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I don't think it is about protecting flair players but more to do with penalising consistant fouling.

If a player constantly commits a foul then he should get booked, but no defender is going to say "Oh look, that guys a bit good, I'll let him play fancy football around me to make the game more attractive".

I don't think fergie can get too excited though, if you watch Vidic, he is one of the dirtiest players in the league, but he seems to get away with a lot.

Really? Dirty? Vidic?

I would never have thought so. Tough, commited and not afraid to stick the boot in, of course. And yeah, he does his share of fouling, but I wouldn't have said he was a dirty player - a dirty player imo is a player who lunges in two footed or sets out to injure players - I don't think it would be fair to say that of Vidic.

Fratton Fred

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Really? Dirty? Vidic?

I would never have thought so. Tough, commited and not afraid to stick the boot in, of course. And yeah, he does his share of fouling, but I wouldn't have said he was a dirty player - a dirty player imo is a player who lunges in two footed or sets out to injure players - I don't think it would be fair to say that of Vidic.

Oh no, I would never say he was a Vinnie Jones break someone's leg type dirty player, but he does his fair share of pushing and shoving and making his presence known, as does Terry. they are just as bad if not worse than any other defender in the league, but Fergie seems to conviently forget that.

Mitch Connor

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Oh no, I would never say he was a Vinnie Jones break someone's leg type dirty player, but he does his fair share of pushing and shoving and making his presence known, as does Terry. they are just as bad if not worse than any other defender in the league, but Fergie seems to conviently forget that.

But he is not saying that dirty players are out to get him (though Ronaldo is targeted for special attention as any other top player is) He is saying, imo, that skillfull players get fouled more and that more yellows should be given out to stop defenders from consistently going in hard on them. I don't think it is a 'dirty defender' issue, just the fact poor tackles will be made, and some refs will be less likely to show a yellow for a poor tackle on Ronnie, Robinho, Walcott, Joe Cole etc because of the nature of the game - they hold onto the ball more so will be fouled more, and have more poor fouls against them. If the refs did yellow every deserving tackle on the more skillfull players, you would see a lot of red cards every week, so I can understand the hesitancy for showing yellows but i do think defenders are more likely to get away with a tackle on the players mentioned when by the laws of the game they shouldn't.

I would say there are very few dirty players in the game in england - a lot of tough tacklers, but very few dirty guys.

RasTa

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I

I don't think fergie can get too excited though, if you watch Vidic, he is one of the dirtiest players in the league, but he seems to get away with a lot.

What is this nonsense. There is nothing dirty about some physicality. Brown is a tougher tackler then Vidic anyway.

Xavi6

RasTa wrote: »

What is this nonsense. There is nothing dirty about some physicality. Brown is a tougher tackler then Vidic anyway.

Now now. We all saw his shirt pull on Agbonlahor at the weekend when he was done from pace. A dirty tactic that he got away with.

Mitch Connor

Xavi6 wrote: »

Now now. We all saw his shirt pull on Agbonlahor at the weekend when he was done from pace. A dirty tactic that he got away with.

He didn't pull him down, he pulled him back:D It was when he won the ball (only cause he had pulled him back) that they both fell over. IMO, the tackle in the box (in isolation) was fair, its just he shouldn't have been in a position to make that tackle.

Also, if you are calling that dirty, then every single defending player in the prem is a dirty player. Not one player has never tugged on a jersey.

Xavi6

Mitch Connor wrote: »

He didn't pull him down, he pulled him back:D It was when he won the ball (only cause he had pulled him back) that they both fell over. IMO, the tackle in the box (in isolation) was fair, its just he shouldn't have been in a position to make that tackle.

He also had his arm over Gabby's shoulder while holding onto his jersey. It was essentially a professional foul outside the box that was a free kick but went unpunished. Dirty tactics which he got away with.

Also, if you are calling that dirty, then every single defending player in the prem is a dirty player. Not one player has never tugged on a jersey.

100% agree. All that bollox at corners should be stamped out. Frees out and even penalties should be given.

Mitch Connor

Xavi6 wrote: »

He also had his arm over Gabby's shoulder while holding onto his jersey. It was essentially a professional foul outside the box that was a free kick but went unpunished. Dirty tactics which he got away with.



100% agree. All that bollox at corners should be stamped out. Frees out and even penalties should be given.

Well then I'll look forward to you commenting on the dirtiness of your own teams players at the weekend, as every single one of them pulls on a jersey or a player.

IMO, fouling is not the same as being dirty, but you disagree so we'll leave it.

RasTa

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Well then I'll look forward to you commenting on the dirtiness of your own teams players at the weekend, as every single one of them pulls on a jersey or a player..

Indeed look at Two-Tonne he is always at it. If your strong you can just shrug it off or stop and look for a free kick

Mr Alan

When reading this thread, Ferdinand and Vidic kicking Torres out of the game in Old Trafford last year immediately springs to mind.

HalloweenJack

No, they should get on with their game.

I hate the idea of "protecting" players. It's so stupid.

Why should some players be protected instead of others? Someone tell me.

kida

Mr Alan wrote: »

When reading this thread, Ferdinand and Vidic kicking Torres out of the game in Old Trafford last year immediately springs to mind.

Oh Dear - worms can opened:D

RasTa

kida wrote: »

Oh Dear - worms can opened:D

lol that's why Liverpool lost that day... I thought Bennett was the official line the fans where going with for that game.

Loco

bigstar wrote: »

is it right to give these types of players an advantage and penalise more physical players.

i think its an important part of football to be physical.

Where is the advantage? There is a rulebook, and they should adhere to it. If Ronaldo gets kicked in the knee by a high and dangerous challenge, there is no intention of giving an advantage, it is to punish a dangerous challenge...

Secondly, of course football should be physical. Ronaldo loves to run at players, but i guaruntee you he gets just the same satisfaction when he fairly shoulders them off the ball, or legally tussles for position in the box for a cross/corner. He has proven both his superior skill and strength over and over.

Wish players would stop trying to hurt him and concentrate on their football!

He might not be so successful in making fools of them constantly if they thought about playing football not taekwondo!!

Loco

HalloweenJack wrote: »

No, they should get on with their game.

I hate the idea of "protecting" players. It's so stupid.

Why should some players be protected instead of others? Someone tell me.

Some players don't require protection, Carrick for example will constantly pass.

I believe the general theme here is to stop over zealous tackles on difficult-to challenge flair players.

Nobody wants to see what happens Eduardo happen again. Who would we have to hate if Ronaldo was in a wheelchair!

bigstar

Loco wrote: »

Where is the advantage? There is a rulebook, and they should adhere to it. If Ronaldo gets kicked in the knee by a high and dangerous challenge, there is no intention of giving an advantage, it is to punish a dangerous challenge...

Secondly, of course football should be physical. Ronaldo loves to run at players, but i guaruntee you he gets just the same satisfaction when he fairly shoulders them off the ball, or legally tussles for position in the box for a cross/corner. He has proven both his superior skill and strength over and over.

Wish players would stop trying to hurt him and concentrate on their football!

He might not be so successful in making fools of them constantly if they thought about playing football not taekwondo!!

yes there is a rulebook, and if you foul a player you should be penalised. thats not what im saying. but there is a call for attacking players to be given special attention by refs because they get tackled more. attacking players do get tackled more, defenders tackle, attackers get tackled, thats football. my problem is in that saying ronaldo, torres, fabregas deserve the refs protection ruins the game as a sport. and you make ronaldo sound like an innocent in all this, hes the worst diver in the game. rooney apologised for diving on tuesday, ronaldo does that kind of thing every week. refs need to be strict with tackling but also fair. they need to be strict too with diving, but i cant see that happening, flair players need to entertain and you cant entertain if your being tackled supposedly

Boggles

bigstar wrote: »

yes there is a rulebook, and if you foul a player you should be penalised. thats not what im saying. but there is a call for attacking players to be given special attention by refs because they get tackled more. attacking players do get tackled more, defenders tackle, attackers get tackled, thats football. my problem is in that saying ronaldo, torres, fabregas deserve the refs protection ruins the game as a sport. and you make ronaldo sound like an innocent in all this, hes the worst diver in the game. rooney apologised for diving on tuesday, ronaldo does that kind of thing every week. refs need to be strict with tackling but also fair. they need to be strict too with diving, but i cant see that happening, flair players need to entertain and you cant entertain if your being tackled supposedly

When was the last time off the top of your head, Ronaldo was booked for diving?

Mitch Connor

bigstar wrote: »

yes there is a rulebook, and if you foul a player you should be penalised. thats not what im saying. but there is a call for attacking players to be given special attention by refs because they get tackled more. attacking players do get tackled more, defenders tackle, attackers get tackled, thats football. my problem is in that saying ronaldo, torres, fabregas deserve the refs protection ruins the game as a sport. and you make ronaldo sound like an innocent in all this, hes the worst diver in the game. rooney apologised for diving on tuesday, ronaldo does that kind of thing every week. refs need to be strict with tackling but also fair. they need to be strict too with diving, but i cant see that happening, flair players need to entertain and you cant entertain if your being tackled supposedly

Yeah - it is dificult to be effective when you are being consistently fouled, and defenders will keep fouling the players like Ronaldo or Torres as long as they aren't getting carded. The protection that is being asked for, is for yellow cards to be dished out for tackles that deserve them - as some refs will hesitate in giving out yellows if they think there is a high chance of giving the same player another yellow later on.

bigstar

Boggles wrote: »

When was the last time off the top of your head, Ronaldo was booked for diving?

i dont know, thats my point. refs should punish bad tackles but also bad diving or even have retrospective punishment, not this protection nonsense. ronaldo and others go down at the slightest touch and frequently get frees. good tackling and good skill should be rewarded, and bad tackling and bad sportsmanship should be punished

Boggles

bigstar wrote: »

yes there is a rulebook, and if you foul a player you should be penalised. thats not what im saying. but there is a call for attacking players to be given special attention by refs because they get tackled more. attacking players do get tackled more, defenders tackle, attackers get tackled, thats football. my problem is in that saying ronaldo, torres, fabregas deserve the refs protection ruins the game as a sport. and you make ronaldo sound like an innocent in all this, hes the worst diver in the game. rooney apologised for diving on tuesday, ronaldo does that kind of thing every week. refs need to be strict with tackling but also fair. they need to be strict too with diving, but i cant see that happening, flair players need to entertain and you cant entertain if your being tackled supposedly

Ronaldo does not go down at the "slightest touch", he would never have scored 42 goals if he did.

He goes down threatically, but that is not the same as diving, diving is going down without been fouled.

Like Rooney did this week, Like Gerrard did against Athletico.

I can't actually remember the last time Ronaldo was booked for diving for the record. Give the Refs some credit if he was the worst offeneder, they would have caught him at least once.

bigstar

i think refs get too much credit to be honest, they are too inconsistent. on ronaldo i think he goes own too easy, drogba too. you disagree. we have different views on the game. i know gerrard and rooney do it too a lot of players do. refs go on about intent. no player intends to foul and give away a penalty, rooney went down on tuesday because he thought he was going to be tackled. what happened to waiting until your tackled first. ronaldo got a penalty last season that was suspect and explained the defender put him off his movement. fouls for being put off, this is ridiculous. its part of professionalism to cheat if you can get away with it. these players get away with it and now they need more protection to exploit the rules further

Mitch Connor

he dives and gets free kicks though (boro off the top of my head, a while ago admitadly) or dives and doesn't get a free or a card (like Rooney). Just becuase he has not been booked, does not mean he has not dived.

I do think he dives a lot less now then he used to, but it still goes down to easily imo.

roryc

Fratton Fred wrote: »

if you watch Vidic, he is one of the dirtiest players in the league, but he seems to get away with a lot.

This is simply not true...