Gareth Bale

[Spur of the moment]

It was tactical thing for them
Quite clever TBF
The Chelsea lad did loads of them

I struggle to understand why the tactical foul still gains acceptance. All teams do it but I'd argue the more attacking sides are the ones with most to lose from it. Not just because a higher number of their attacks get disrupted but also because their more talented players are the ones most targeted.

As I've said in a previous thread, it's high time the tactical foul was properly outlawed. It's ugly, disrupts the flow of the game, favours the thug and more often than not rewards the defending side because they have the chance to get all their players behind the ball and marshal the defence. That's more likely to be teams at the bottom of the league desperate not to concede.

It's clear that bookings and free kicks are no deterrent. Managers plan their strategies and ensure the bookings get shared around. It's high time the lawmakers came up with more effective punishments.

End of rant.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I struggle to understand why the tactical foul still gains acceptance. All teams do it but I'd argue the more attacking sides are the ones with most to lose from it. Not just because a higher number of their attacks get disrupted but also because their more talented players are the ones most targeted.

As I've said in a previous thread, it's high time the tactical foul was properly outlawed. It's ugly, disrupts the flow of the game, favours the thug and more often than not rewards the defending side because they have the chance to get all their players behind the ball and marshal the defence. That's more likely to be teams at the bottom of the league desperate not to concede.

It's clear that bookings and free kicks are no deterrent. Managers plan their strategies and ensure the bookings get shared around. It's high time the lawmakers came up with more effective punishments.

End of rant.

It’s part of the game
If a player is willing to sacrifice a booking for example then that’s their call
I don’t like it but it’s normal now
Like shepherding the ball out for a goal kick without touching it

 

[billyiddo]

Tactical fouling has always been a part of the game - just someone decided to give it a name a few years ago and it's become a thing

 

[Baleforce]

I struggle to understand why the tactical foul still gains acceptance. All teams do it but I'd argue the more attacking sides are the ones with most to lose from it. Not just because a higher number of their attacks get disrupted but also because their more talented players are the ones most targeted.

As I've said in a previous thread, it's high time the tactical foul was properly outlawed. It's ugly, disrupts the flow of the game, favours the thug and more often than not rewards the defending side because they have the chance to get all their players behind the ball and marshal the defence. That's more likely to be teams at the bottom of the league desperate not to concede.

It's clear that bookings and free kicks are no deterrent. Managers plan their strategies and ensure the bookings get shared around. It's high time the lawmakers came up with more effective punishments.

End of rant.

how would you change the laws to stop it?

 

[Finney Is Back]

Because the refs actually call stuff against us as vs. for .. I looked at the City/Pool game, zero fudging chance if Walker made the same foul against us that he did against Mane we get a penalty .. absolutely zero

Agree with the general consensus .. the chelsea scumbag should have been off, repeated niggling/professional fouling the entire fudging game ..

I think that would be given as a penalty in any game, no matter who playing.

 

[Bullet]

Agree with the general consensus .. the chelsea scumbag should have been off, repeated niggling/professional fouling the entire fudging game ..

At least Hojbjerg will query this with the ref and make him aware what is going on. We should do more of that i.e. pointing out to the ref "that's the third time this guy clattered us"

 

[glorygloryeze]

Who is this 'Chelsea lad' that people are saying fouled Bale/our players a lot?

 

[Jordinho]

Who is this 'Chelsea lad' that people are saying fouled Bale/our players a lot?

The Robbie Savage wannabe. Spent the whole game running around trying to kick our players.

 

[glorygloryeze]

The Robbie Savage wannabe. Spent the whole game running around trying to kick our players.

Who the bleep was that?? I saw a decent amount of the match and i barely remember!!

 

[Jordinho]

Who the bleep was that?? I saw a decent amount of the match and i barely remember!!

 

[glorygloryeze]

Oh yeah..i had no idea he was a Chelsea loanee/youth/qunt...!
Barely noticed these fouls too (but maybe that was how sneaky he was lol)

 

[Finney Is Back]

I thought he looked a decent player.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I thought he looked a decent player.

He did
He won’t make it to a top half side but may make it for a burnley level

 

[Spur of the moment]

Tactical fouling has always been a part of the game - just someone decided to give it a name a few years ago and it's become a thing

All types of foul are a part of the game, but that does not mean we have to accept them. Of course you are never going to completely eradicate tactical fouls but a stronger deterrent would reduce it dramatically.

There was a time when the tackle from behind was '"part of the game" as you put it but it's since been outlawed. It's not that long ago that hospital tackles and other acts of thuggery were once routine, but owing to the introduction of more more severe punishments in recent decades that type of animal behaviour has been largely eradicated.

The tactical foul is 'accepted' because the authorities do not have the balls to put in place a more effective deterrent. Personally I would award a penalty to the opposition regardless of where a tactical foul was committed on the pitch. That'd soon put an end to it.

 

[Spur of the moment]

how would you change the laws to stop it?

One idea would be to rule that the offending side could have, say, only five players ahead of the ball when the free kick is taken. That might even things up a bit.

Alternatively 'sin bin' the offending player for, say. 15 minutes. That would be on top of a booking.

If neither of those measures proved effective then I'd award a penalty to the opposition regardless of where the offence took place on the pitch. And before you say, whoa, that's way too harsh, ask yourself how long it would be before the tactical foul was eliminated altogether? My guess is, overnight, because the whole point of the tactical foul is to reduce the chance of conceding. So logic suggests there'd be no more penalties in a game than there are now. And the tactical foul would become a thing of the past.

Bingo!

 

[Lemonade Money]

One idea would be to rule that the offending side could have, say, only five players ahead of the ball when the free kick is taken. That might even things up a bit.

Alternatively 'sin bin' the offending player for, say. 15 minutes. That would be on top of a booking.

If neither of those measures proved effective then I'd award a penalty to the opposition regardless of where the offence took place on the pitch. And before you say, whoa, that's way too harsh, ask yourself how long it would be before the tactical foul was eliminated altogether? My guess is, overnight, because the whole point of the tactical foul is to reduce the chance of conceding. So logic suggests there'd be no more penalties in a game than there are now. And the tactical foul would become a thing of the past.

Bingo!

You want diving all over the pitch, not just in penalty areas!

 

[Baleforce]

One idea would be to rule that the offending side could have, say, only five players ahead of the ball when the free kick is taken. That might even things up a bit.

Alternatively 'sin bin' the offending player for, say. 15 minutes. That would be on top of a booking.

If neither of those measures proved effective then I'd award a penalty to the opposition regardless of where the offence took place on the pitch. And before you say, whoa, that's way too harsh, ask yourself how long it would be before the tactical foul was eliminated altogether? My guess is, overnight, because the whole point of the tactical foul is to reduce the chance of conceding. So logic suggests there'd be no more penalties in a game than there are now. And the tactical foul would become a thing of the past.

Bingo!

Sounds a bit gimmicky, and as @LemonadeMoney says, it’s open to abuse elsewhere.

I don’t have a problem with the tactical foul, it’s a defensive resource to burn through and it’s the same for everyone, we shouldn’t be looking to make changes to the game just because some people are smarter than others, that should be encouraged, defending is football too.

 

[scaramanga]

I struggle to understand why the tactical foul still gains acceptance. All teams do it but I'd argue the more attacking sides are the ones with most to lose from it. Not just because a higher number of their attacks get disrupted but also because their more talented players are the ones most targeted.

As I've said in a previous thread, it's high time the tactical foul was properly outlawed. It's ugly, disrupts the flow of the game, favours the thug and more often than not rewards the defending side because they have the chance to get all their players behind the ball and marshal the defence. That's more likely to be teams at the bottom of the league desperate not to concede.

It's clear that bookings and free kicks are no deterrent. Managers plan their strategies and ensure the bookings get shared around. It's high time the lawmakers came up with more effective punishments.

End of rant.

I agree. It would have seen Leicester relegated the season they fluked it too.

 

[Bullet]

There was a time when the tackle from behind was '"part of the game" as you put it but it's since been outlawed. It's not that long ago that hospital tackles and other acts of thuggery were once routine, but owing to the introduction of more more severe punishments in recent decades that type of animal behaviour has been largely eradicated.

I heartily agree and remember having arguments (perhaps on here?) with people that thought the game had gone soft and that smashing through someone's ankles from behind was fair game.

Likewise if you ever watch a Liverpool game from the late 70s / early 80s, it is shocking to see the centre backs roll it back to the keeper, who rolls it back to them, who roll it back to the keeper... that is not football.

 

[braineclipse]

I struggle to understand why the tactical foul still gains acceptance. All teams do it but I'd argue the more attacking sides are the ones with most to lose from it. Not just because a higher number of their attacks get disrupted but also because their more talented players are the ones most targeted.

As I've said in a previous thread, it's high time the tactical foul was properly outlawed. It's ugly, disrupts the flow of the game, favours the thug and more often than not rewards the defending side because they have the chance to get all their players behind the ball and marshal the defence. That's more likely to be teams at the bottom of the league desperate not to concede.

It's clear that bookings and free kicks are no deterrent. Managers plan their strategies and ensure the bookings get shared around. It's high time the lawmakers came up with more effective punishments.

End of rant.

Bookings would be more of a deterred if they were handed out more consistently.

As things are you can see players truly surprised to get a yellow for an early tactical foul because they expect to get away with it.

I suppose it's about being smart, making tactical fouls look like genuine tackling attempts. Having harsher punishment for tactical fouling could be good, but it's often difficult to judge intensions.

One thing that irritates me is tactical fouls that are also clear yellow card nasty tackles by themselves. It's like a free nasty tackle because you would get a yellow anyway for any foul. Would like to see those given as two yellows/a red.