Sunday, April 20, 2014

On days I feel like an alien...

This is the angle that people (who I can only assume have conscious or unconscious leanings at play) are repeatedly offering, with a strange certainty this proves the Jozy Altidore call from yesterday was wrong - if not additionally an outright dive.




Now setting aside the delightful fact that this camera view is about 80° and further in distance away than the linesman who called it, I do not see the confusion, let alone any call for cries of a dive. The trailing foot of the defender takes out the planting footing of the attacker, who has his head turned.

I think some people like to see what they want to see and work backwards from there. Why? Dunno. Maybe they love Chelsea, maybe they dislike the player, maybe they just think like a defender.

Now, I am certain some folks may accuse me of a bias. They are correct, I do have a religious adherence to events as they happened and agreeable facts, in this case known as The Laws Of The Game. After Sky announcers and studio mopes spent the better part of a half hour dissecting the play over and over from every conceivable angle at a variety of speeds, straining to prove it could not possibly be legit (or even that at full speed it could look legit to the linesman standing nearby), thank goodness Jamie Redknapp came along to read them the reality act. If I can find a clip of that, I will post it here. 

Yeah, sorry. I see a foul in the area. And I am not really clear on what else there is to see or discuss.




- Greg Seltzer

45 comments:

dikranovich said...

Oh, I guess if there is nothing further to discuss, then why bother? Jozy does know how to go down easy.

You could be watching Suarez right now as well, another player who knows how to go down, but he can snap right back up in a heart beat and strike. Jozy is usually sitting there with his hands up, waiting for a foul.

This particular play from yesterday, sometimes it is ruled a foul, sometimes it isn't.

dan said...

Huh? Suarez is your example of a player who "snap[s] right back up" and isn't "sitting there with his hands up?" About 30 YouTube videos beg to differ.

As to the play in question, I didn't see it (three month olds have pristine timing). That is a stone penalty, and the only way it wouldn't be called such us if the referee blew it, regardless of this sometimes yes/sometimes no stuff.

My only question is how Jozy found himself at such a weird angle? Was he forced that direction? Off to find highlights...

dikranovich said...

Dan, I think if you read the FIFA laws of the game, you will find that direct free kicks are awarded for certain offenses, such as tripping, based on the sole discretion of the officiating crew. The referee must find that the infringement is careless, reckless, or using excessive force.

Officiating is not easy!!!

SleeStaxx said...

As a defender, going to ground in the box and making contact with the attacker that brings him down without getting near the ball is the definition of "careless".

A dicisively physical penna? No.

A textbook penna nonetheless, however? Absolutely.

I am with Greg... it's not even debateable.

What's sad is the big teams (and many pundits that analyze them) are so used to seeing the EPL refs swallow the whistle to their benefit, that textbook calls like this are now somehow villified. Sad really.

dikranovich said...

Land do the lost, as long as you can admit that your definition of careless means squat, and that it is based on the sole discretion of the official.

Tony M said...

Some people seem to be emotionally invested in Jozy not being successful. I do not get it.

I also do not care. Penalty. Good work Jozy

Greg Seltzer said...

@ dikranovich:

Have you ever considered responding to things I actually say? I did not say there is nothing further to discuss, I said I am not clear on what there is to discuss. And no one gets right up to strike when the ball has rolled out of play. You are imagining arguments again.

@ SleeStaxx & Tony M:

Bingo. And bingo.

dikranovich said...

Tony m, my money was on Jozy scoring a good haul of goals this season, so maybe losing that bet has soured me on Jozy.

Or maybe, it could have been my contention all along that Jozy can perform at the World Cup this summer regardless of what he does in the epl.

Tony m, my emotional investment is in seeing our national team excel and place gold stars on their jerseys.

soccer boy said...

Jozy sucked at hull and still did well at the national team. Been getting b.s. service all but still doing the job he is ask to do other than scoring. Nothing to worry about. In camp his quality will show nothing to worry about.

Tony M said...

dikranovich, actually I wasn't referring to you. Partly because I do believe you want him to do well, and partly because I often don't know what you think even after I read your posts. :-)

Phillip said...

This is actually the angle that convinced me 100% that this is a penalty.

The defender's left foot takes out Jozy's left foot. Clear as day to me.

dikranovich said...

Apparently the dubious foul committee is looking at this foul and they could try and change the call

Greg Seltzer said...

See, that would an example of a fairly clever and humorous remark, despite the reality that it is quite steeped in your fondness for "interpreting" perfectly clear rules and the related comments made by me.

Keep up the great work!

futfan said...

No, it wasn't a dive and no, IMO, it wasn't a penalty either. Or rather it might be a by-the-Laws penalty but the cheapest one imaginable.

The way I saw it was that Jozy was having a difficult time controlling the ball (again) and the defender went to into a slide in anticipation of trying to block any cross that might be coming from Jozy. They are both headed toward the endline and the defender's 'tackle' is in no way an attempt at taking the ball from under Jozy's feet. He wasn't even making a play for the ball in that sense. His slide was parallel to the striker's path (not in any way 'into' Jozy).

While trying to find the ball again after a very mediocre touch, Jozy makes an awkward step with his left leg and steps on the defenders tucked, trailing foot (that part is simply a fact) which causes his feet to go from under him. The defender did not "take out" Jozy's standing leg. That's absurd. Jozy stepped on him, lost his ballance and went down as a result.

People can maintain it was a penalty if they like but, looking at it objectively, it was cheap as shit at best as all of the contact was initiated by Jozy. If he had had real control of the ball and knew where it was he wouldn't have ever stepped on the defender.

Having said all of that I am glad it was given. Made Jozy look a bit better.

The really pathetic play was Jozy refusing to take a shot after an admittedly poor pass from Colback on that 3 on 1. And don't anybody tell me it was a good decision to pull it back and play for possession. That is also absurd. Any decent, aggressive striker shoots there and should.

justinwkoehn said...

@futfan

I think Jozy was making a move to turn back the ball with the outside of his right foot to keep the ball in play, and when he went to plant his left foot, he found a sliding defender underneath it, which took him down as well.

In the 3 on 1, I wanted him to shoot as well. The announcers I was listening to wanted Sunderland to play it in the corners and time waste, which apparently was Jozy's mentality as well. He's been looking to be a team player over individual glory all season, which I think has been to his detriment.

futfan said...

>The announcers I was listening to wanted Sunderland to play it in the corners and time waste, which apparently was Jozy's mentality as well.

I don't buy it. I think he is scared to shoot and miss again. I think his balls have abandoned him. Like I said, any truly good striker makes an attempt at goal there. They aren't thinking about wasting time - it doesn't even cross their mind. They are licking their chops at that opportunity.

>He's been looking to be a team player over individual glory all season, which I think has been to his detriment.

I do think he is willing to be a team player and has tried to be that. To his absolute credit. If I were him I would have had heated words (at least) with Borini mid-season if not previous to that.

He's also had to put up with a completely unwarranted amount of abuse from Sunderland fans. Including just yesterday someone on twitter calling him a nigger apparently. His response was very calm and actually kind. I don't know him obviously but I think Jozy is as solid a person as there is probably.

Greg Seltzer said...

@ futfan:

**No, it wasn't a dive and no, IMO, it wasn't a penalty either.**


Heh. It was in the grey ether? Sorry, but that was about the easiest penalty to call for a guy standing mere feet away.



**The way I saw it was that Jozy was having a difficult time controlling the ball (again)... **


Lemme just pause you right there. You are leaving out the shirt-tugging. The foul could have rightly been called before the trip, even though that would have legitimately been harsh.




**They are both headed toward the endline and the defender's 'tackle' is in no way an attempt at taking the ball from under Jozy's feet.**


This is irrelevant.


**He wasn't even making a play for the ball in that sense.**


This supports a PK call.



**His slide was parallel to the striker's path (not in any way 'into' Jozy).**


Slide, yes. Trailing foot, no.


**While trying to find the ball again after a very mediocre touch... **


Ahem. Shirt tug.



**Jozy makes an awkward step with his left leg... **


Erm, no. He makes a cutting step to keep from going out of bounds with the ball.



**... and steps on the defenders tucked, trailing foot (that part is simply a fact) which causes his feet to go from under him.**


It sure looks to me on each of about 230 views so far that the moving back foot sweeps under the heel of Altidore more than a step down. But whether he stepped on the foot or not is irrelevant because it was not a stationary foot. The careless moving foot undermines his footing = foul.


**The defender did not "take out" Jozy's standing leg. That's absurd.**


Huh? He took out the planting leg, with the other foot also off the ground at that moment. He never got to standing foot.


**Jozy stepped on him, lost his ballance and went down as a result.**


Yeah, okay. But I tend to lose my balance when someone cuts under my planting foot, too.


**People can maintain it was a penalty if they like but, looking at it objectively, it was cheap as shit at best as all of the contact was initiated by Jozy. If he had had real control of the ball and knew where it was he wouldn't have ever stepped on the defender.**


Objectively? Hmm. The take on the call is quite complex, with many layers of explanation, including presumptions of intent.

Here is my take: attacker tripped in box by defender = foul.


**Having said all of that I am glad it was given. Made Jozy look a bit better.**


Clearly not to you, it didn't! :D


**The really pathetic play was Jozy refusing to take a shot after an admittedly poor pass from Colback on that 3 on 1. And don't anybody tell me it was a good decision to pull it back and play for possession. That is also absurd. Any decent, aggressive striker shoots there and should.**


Okay, now you are waaaaay off base. He was given a late and poor pass that pulled him away from goal on his slightly weaker left with a defender in his face of a 2-1 lead at Chelsea in/near stoppage time. It was not a favorable shooting position to say the least, so he absolutely did what he is instructed to do in that situation. Tie game, Sunderland down one? You have a point. In this scenario, you have a grudge that defies all soccer teachings. And if he had taken the shot from that poor position and put it off target, as most anyone would do given that forced lean away from goal, he would have gotten hell for not playing the clock. Sorry, but it is all true. Nobody in the game will have any gripe for that play. And the announcers bagging on him for it should know that.

Greg Seltzer said...

**Like I said, any truly good striker makes an attempt at goal there. They aren't thinking about wasting time - it doesn't even cross their mind. They are licking their chops at that opportunity.**


What now? You act like you have never seen an attacker play the clock before? It is really quite common.

Sorry, but a player striving to get playing time back is not going to do something that can potentially hurt the team because he is on the schnide. At least not one with the team mindset of Altidore. He could have 14 goals in the last 6 games and need one to tie the league leader, and he would play the clock.

futfan said...

Greg, you are so biased it is funny. Seriously. Said without any type of malice at all: You are a complete homer.

If that penalty were to be given to Ghana in similar circumstances in our match with them in the upcoming WC, I'd wager you'd be beside yourself.


And with regard to the lack of a shot attempt on the 3 on 1 break... It's cool to disagree and everything but you are hanging your ass way out there in the wind. You are seriously going to sit there and try to convince people that Suarez or Ronaldo or even a mid-table PL striker wouldn't have gone for goal? Seriously? Any truly decent striker would have completely ignored anything he had been told about time wasting. Wouldn't have even thought about it. It wouldn't have been a 'choice'. The reaction would have been to try to put the ball on frame. Full stop.

Again, said with love but you are a complete homer...lol.

dikranovich said...

Law 12 fouls and misconduct
Direct free kicks

A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner CONSIDERED BY THE REFEREE to be careless, reckless, or using excessive force.

One of the seven offenses is tripping

This law is so key in this debate, and it seems to be disregarded by most .

SleeStaxx said...

@futfan

I think Greg can be a little Jozy-biased at times as well...

However, in this case, it's a penna hands-down and he is absolutely correct.

I've read numerous opinions otherwise that all opine based on misinterpretation of the rules...

justinwkoehn said...

futfan, I think circumstances dictate if a striker has a crack at goal there. If it's 2-1 Liverpool vs Chelsea next week at the end of the second half, I'm not sure Suarez does rip one there. If Liverpool's championship hopes are in the balance (much like Sunderland's bid for avoiding relegation was), it's a very tough decision to risk launching one off target and giving Chelsea another possession to tie it. The fact that Jozy is not given many decent looks plays into this as well. If he gets any sort of look, we are screaming for him to shoot it because we want so badly for him to end is drought. I think the top 4 and bottom 5 of the table play the clock with only a couple minutes left with the lead.

Greg Seltzer said...

@ futfan:

**Greg, you are so biased it is funny. Seriously. Said without any type of malice at all: You are a complete homer.**


Pffft. That is just nonsense. My bias is to factual reality.




**If that penalty were to be given to Ghana in similar circumstances in our match with them in the upcoming WC, I'd wager you'd be beside yourself.**


Yeah... at the US defender for being so careless.



**And with regard to the lack of a shot attempt on the 3 on 1 break... It's cool to disagree and everything but you are hanging your ass way out there in the wind. You are seriously going to sit there and try to convince people that Suarez or Ronaldo or even a mid-table PL striker wouldn't have gone for goal? Seriously? Any truly decent striker would have completely ignored anything he had been told about time wasting. Wouldn't have even thought about it. It wouldn't have been a 'choice'. The reaction would have been to try to put the ball on frame. Full stop.**


You are imagining as fact. And, erm, do you have any idea how many times I was there in person to watch Suarez kill clock? As if picking the best two players in the world this season to rep for all forwards was going to get by me in the first place...




Greg Seltzer said...

@ dikranovich:

You hit the nail on the head. Nothing to add.


@ SleeStaxx:

**I think Greg can be a little Jozy-biased at times as well...**


Sigh. And Greg knows way too many people out there have a running bias against the player, which apparently makes him look like he is overpraising or defending when he is merely stating something factual beyond the quick reaction or easy answer.

Jozy Altidore has had precious little praise from me this entire season, and not much in my US ratings since Panama in October, either.

dikranovich said...

I think the point of law 12 is that it is the official who determines if a shirt tug is free kick worthy foul. It's not Greg seltzer who makes this decision. It not dan, or Stan, or futfan

This is so lost on this discussion.

Greg Seltzer said...

Where did you see me say the foul should have been called for those shirt tugs? That was mentioned as a factor in my responses to the assertion that Altidore was having trouble controlling the ball as he started into the area.

I promise to you, reading comprehension is not going to hurt. Give it another try.

dikranovich said...

Greg, you lost this debate, and it is ok because it's not the first, nor last time.

Greg Seltzer said...

Yeah, I fully admit to losing the strawman debate that took place in your head. The one in reality that is based on things I actually said?

Dunnobouthatson.

justinwkoehn said...

@dikranovich
Debate on the considerations the referee took into account has been central to the discussions here. No one is debating whether or not the referee gave the penalty at his discretion based on his interpretation of the rules. The debate has been what infractions actually occurred vs. what the referee might have perceived at the time. If we just end every and all discussions on refereeing decisions with simply "it was up to the refs discretion, end of story" then these would be very boring discussions indeed.

dikranovich said...

As is usually the case, we discuss the merits of a post. This altidore post ended with an assertion by the author that he saw no reason to discuss further.

At least we now know that there was and is reason to discuss further.

You would at least have to admit that people see this play from both sides, as a foul, as adjudicated by the official, and as a play that could have gone without a foul being given, as would be the case with numerous plays in the box that go uncalled, in virtually every game played on any given soccer day.

dikranovich said...

It's interesting in the wording used by the author. He says the defender takes out the planting "footing". The defender did not take out altidores planted foot, because it was not yet planted.

I guess it's why I'm always reminded of the dubious goal committee debate and just how debates go in general. The Strauss article debate, the Ajax fan rushing the AZ goalkeeper debate, and many more.

justinwkoehn said...

If a defender slides under a player that is in possession of the ball, and the attacking player steps on the sliding defender, that seems like a trip to me, especially if the defender got no where near the ball. I've watched it in slow motion numerous times now. Then I go back to the full speed reply, and the conclusion is verified. I don't think it matters if the defender clips Jozy's foot as it's planted, or slides a foot underneath Jozy's, it's a trip inside the box, and will be called 99% of the time.

Greg Seltzer said...

@ dikranovich:

**This altidore post ended with an assertion by the author that he saw no reason to discuss further.**



For the second time, that is not what the last sentence says. It says I am unclear on what else there is to discuss. And since it is the second time, we can only assume you are lying to be disruptive because you have nothing else. Per usual.




**You would at least have to admit that people see this play from both sides, as a foul, as adjudicated by the official, and as a play that could have gone without a foul being given, as would be the case with numerous plays in the box that go uncalled, in virtually every game played on any given soccer day.**



Says who? Why should I admit that? And how does the fact that some fouls go uncalled make this not a foul?



**It's interesting in the wording used by the author. He says the defender takes out the planting "footing". The defender did not take out altidores planted foot, because it was not yet planted.**


Does this even mean anything?



**I guess it's why I'm always reminded of the dubious goal committee debate and just how debates go in general. The Strauss article debate, the Ajax fan rushing the AZ goalkeeper debate, and many more.**


The debate was not even over the dubious goal committee and the person who rushed the AZ keeper was not an Ajax fan. You see, there is no such thing as a debate in which one person simply gets to make up alternate realities filled with strawmen.

justinwkoehn said...

I think you two just need to have a beer together and talk it out.

Greg Seltzer said...

Yeeeah, I think we have proven that talking has no effect. Three years later and he still imagines Almere is part of Amsterdam. For some bizarre reason.

dikranovich said...

Who gives a shit, Ajax is in partnership with Almere city. Almere city fans are Ajax fans, but not necessarily vice versa.

There is no contention here with altidore winning a valuable PK for his team, which he did. He won the PK. It's really that simple. It's the author of this blog who brought up all of the other stuff.

Greg Seltzer said...

Ummmm... surely you do realize that anyone can scroll up a half dozen posts and see clearly that you brought up all those old arguments. Again.

dikranovich said...

We can save everyone trouble, just go listen to Gus poyets post match comments. Game over, chalk another one up for the good guys.

Bring on the next debate!!!

Greg Seltzer said...

Ah yes! Gus Poyet, official arbiter of reality!

His post-game comments were pathetic. The man has no idea what he is doing, other than kissing up to Chelsea.

dikranovich said...

It's over Johnny!!!

Greg Seltzer said...

Says the guy who repeatedly brings up arguments he lost like a fool three years ago. And my name is not Johnny.

justinwkoehn said...

Slightly back on topic: Any word on Wickham's fitness this week? I ask because I have a feeling there's a strong correlation to Jozy's playing time here. Just a hunch though.

Greg Seltzer said...

I have not seen it mentioned in news at all. No telling what that means.

brooklyn cat said...

what's so pathetic about poyet's comments? that he conceded it was a close call? that he would have been upset had the call gone against his team? sounds reasonable to me... full disclosure, am sunderland fan first and jozy fan second; still thrilled that he won the penalty and hope that he will still play a vital part in sunderland's bid to stay up.

dikranovich said...

Po boy took over a team that had one point from seven games. They are 28 points in the 27 games since.

Red card have put Sunderland against the ropes several times this season, and that has muted the attack. At the worst time as well, against teams like hull.

Still, Sunderland has three winnable home fixtures left and an away game against Man U . This is very exciting stuff and I think altidore will play a part and he really has a chance to go from whatever you wanna call it that the Sunderland fans see him as, to a real American hero. Fight for the rights of every man!!!

I just want to get an early lead on the next debate