The Professional Foul

[edwardstagg]

Now i know that we can't change the rules, to give us an advantage. But i have realised how unfair the whole 'rule' is. Robbo was one-on-one with keeper Bunn today, when Jason Crowe 'tackled' him.

Now i Undesrtand that Crowe has been sent off, which is fair but - thats no consolation for what we could have had, and that was a 2-0 lead!

I think that if the player (in this case Robbo) is able to get up, and is physically able to continue, the referee's should play an advantage, so that the player has a chance to score. Almost like the 'advantage' rule. If Robbo had have missed, then fair enough, the decision could be pulled back to where the incident took place, and the defender should still be sent off.

Going down to 10 men is sometimes not entirely a bad thing, teams tend to play 'tight' and become hard to break down. So I believe that the 'Professional Foul' rule is a little unfair on the attacking team.

And it's not just because of the incident today, i genuinly think that it's a silly punishment, why do referee's have to blow straight away? Let the game go on for 10 seconds longer - just to see what 'would' have happened

In this case we would have won the game - and Northampton would have gotten what they deserved for 'serious foul play'. As it happens, they havn't been punished anywhere near enough. It sounds bitter i know - but it is pretty unfair that we are denied a goalscoring opportunity, and we aren't given something to compensate for it, well, something of 'much' significance.

But then again, Town can be blamed for not making the most of the Ten Men we were up against.

[Dell12]

The referee is able to play advantage if the player looks like he can get up and carry on. I wasn't at the game today so I can't comment, but did Roberts try to get up and carry on? Some Refs are better at doing so however.

If your 1-0 up in the last minute and they have a player through on goal it probably makes sense to take him out, equally if its in the first minute it's probably better to concede the goal but keep 11 on the pitch!

[ShortbreadPete]

It didn't look like their guy made contact to me and it looked like a harsh sending off

[NookTerrier]

I think he did make contact, however Roberts could not have got up and continued to get the ball.

[bigcitylights]

Just a little catch up (I know how it takes for news to get up north) but we sold Mark Bunn to Blackburn in August.

Our current goalkeeper is youngster Chris Dunn.

[Deleted]

Unless my eyes were playing tricks, didn't the exact same thing happen with Cadders through on goal a few minutes later, only with more contact? Result................ nowt! Funny old game.

[Deleted]

The one on Cads was a blatant foul the ref bottled it as if he had given a free kick he would have had to send the defender off reducing them to nine men so soon after going down to ten.

Thought the ref was poor again yesterday. It's about time we got some decent officals at this level.

[Mastercracker]

Jan 11, 2009 15:09:30 GMT 1 @donniebrasco said:

The one on Cads was a blatant foul the ref bottled it as if he had given a free kick he would have had to send the defender off reducing them to nine men so soon after going down to ten.

Thought the ref was poor again yesterday. It's about time we got some decent officals at this level.

Exactly what I said at the time. It was a blatent freekick and he was clean through.

[Tez]

The ref should have sent off the other Cobblers defender for the foul on Cads but gave nowt as was told by a mate who went to the game. Mental.

[Deleted]

The Cads one was a blatent foul, but I don't think that one deserved a red as Cads was quite wide and other defenders were back.

[calken]

It has to be an impossible decision for a referee. The team has to gain an advantage, but which one? A goal, one less player to play against or both. Each opposition responds differently on different days, so it's a no win situation.

The ref wasn't wrong, he made the correct decision, we had the advantage, the blame lies in our team failing to capitalise on that advantage. It's nothing to do with the ref. A good team should play well and respond well irrespective of the officials. A player has far more influence on a game than the officials have, some players have been spending far too many years shifting the blame and the officials are easy targets.

How many reports have you seen from both supporting fans claiming the ref was against them?

Didn't go to the game, so can't comment on either incidents. I really miss going to away games.

[Deleted]

Jan 11, 2009 15:32:21 GMT 1 paulmat said:

... Cads was quite wide ...

Are you calling him fat? ;D

[Torquayterrier]

If they changed the rule so that with incidents like this where a player is impeded and it's a 'last man' siutuation but it doesn't constitute violent conduct resulted in a penalty but no sending off it would probably happen a lot less often.

[stevvy]

if theyre the last man and foul a guy in the box,red card and penalty,but if theyre the last man and its outside the box,red card and then allow the player who was fouled (if theyre not injured) to restart and go through 1 on 1 with the keeper,as it has to be said alot of people would rather have the goal than the red card-imagine if roberts wouldve been able to stay on his feet n go though to score,fair less chance of us ending up drawing the game as we'd have a 2 goal lead,and though still against 11 men,at least we'd have the benefit of having the 2 goal lead,which id say is (especially given towns record against 10 men) far more important than playing against 10 men

[Deleted]

This is all, of course, assuming that Roberts would have indeed gone on to score, by the way ...

[Grandfather Berty of Cleck]

Jan 10, 2009 22:11:44 GMT 1 NookTerrier said:

I think he did make contact, however Roberts could not have got up and continued to get the ball.

I also think he made contact but Roberts went down far too easily (and not for the first time)
why didn't he just carry on and score?

[terrier67]

My understanding of the "professional foul" is that it is a calculated decision by the "professional" to stop the opposition in a cynical manner. This can happen all over the pitch - eg how many times have we seen a player taken out in midfield (Worthy ) because the clever "pro" sees that he is in sh!t creek and things can develop into a cavalry charge on the goal. I would say that a professional foul, wherever it is on the pitch should attract a booking. If it is deemed the "last-man" then a penalty should be awarded, wherever it occurs on the pitch. That way, cynical play is not condoned and treated the same all over the pitch, and a goal-scoring opportunity is still given for a last-man offence. Most teams would rather take the goal, but players have to have a deterrent against the cynical foul play.



In my humble opinion ....