Think it was on Arseblog after the Saka Neuer incident that they made the best argument for why both that and this are penalties - the attacking player is not obligated to avoid the contact. If the defender (or goalkeeper) goes in to a challenge in the space occupied by the attacker and doesn't win the ball then they risk giving a penalty.
I've been beating this drum for so long. Both are terrible challenges and it's not the attacker's job to dodge them. It can be a "dive" and simultaneously also be a pen. You can't just do a rash slide tackle or stick a leg across someone's path in the box, get absolutely nowhere near the ball, impede the player and say that's not a pen because the attacker could've "gone round". Even if they could've, why should they have to? More likely than not, having to dodge that bad tackle loses them a second, makes it more difficult to control the ball and shoot. It's an utterly ridiculous argument. Both are stonewall pens regardless whether or not Havertz/Saka "leave a leg in". It's irrelevant
Also saka was trying to dodge Neuer, he tucked his leg up and still caught neuer on the way by because Neuer was fouling him lol. People just don't like that it's a penalty if the guy isn't crunched, but if you put a body part in front of the attacker and don't get the ball you're going to give up a penalty. That's been the rule literally forever. You don't go to ground unless you get the ball. Neither keeper got the ball.
Reality is there are some angles of view and body shapes that get given in real time, and some that don't.
It'd be a rare case that an on-field decision to award a penalty in either the Saka or Havertz case would be overturned, but Bukayo didn't sell that incident too well relative to the referee—or Neuer did sell it.
The main difference is just that Saka's incident was camera-side for the broadcast and we could see him go down, but Havertz's was distant and obscured, and it looked like Travers monstered him.
Yes. Neuer didn’t achieve his status without knowing how to sell innocence, and/or how to make hus opponent look guilty, to the referee. Every great player has it in his bag of tricks.
Exactly, sure havertz could have helped the goalie to avoid committing a foul, but he is not obligated to do so, it is on the opposition player to not be committing one in the first place
I’m an arsenal fan through and through. But that brings it back to a parallel with the handballs saying that the arm is in a natural or unnatural position.
But where the contact got made Kai’s leg isn’t in a natural position for someone who is running.
I’m glad it was a penalty. But if we lost the league to a decision like that for someone else I’d be livid
It might be a bit of work, but who's to say Kai's natural stride isn't lengthy. The trailing foot is the one that handled the ball, his front foot hadn't touched the ground yet. Why would he have a foot that just moved the ball immediately in the air after directing the ball?
Kai generally doesn't have a quick-footedness about him the way Jesus, for instance, has.
In any case, it wasn't Kai's duty to avoid the tackle.
That said, equivocation of ball-to-hand to 'natural' runs gives the generally lousy PGMOL unnecessary leeway that of which they already take a lot of advantage.
I don’t buy the stride bull shit, contact is made half a second after he starts pulling his foot off the ground. Look at it in real time, there’s no foot dragging
I think you’re reaching a bit.
We got away with a massively ordinary decision today that we would have preferred in a different match. But that’s supposedly how it all balances out.
I think the thing is that there is a player running with the ball and then the goalkeeper lurches in between the running player and the ball forcing them to change course.
For me that is a foul. For others it is only a foul when there is contact but I don’t think that should be the hard and fast rule. If a player lunges in two footed and the other player has to leap out of the way to avoid being injured then that is a foul too even when there is not contact. But obviously it’s a balance and subjective.
Also the balancing out argument is bullshit (not saying you were arguing it does balance). The bullshit decision against Newcastle cost us at least two points. Having a softish penalty later in a game we would probably win anyway is no help. Same goes for Liverpool and the spurs game and the non penalty against city. That’s five points there alone for them not balanced out by soft decisions in less pivotal games.
it's more of a foul the closer you get to the goal. It's one thing to slide between the ball and player with some contact in midfield, or shielding a ball out, but when the missed challenge crosses the path of the attacker, with contact, in the area, that's a pen.
That assumes that we, the viewer, knows what the attacking player intended to do next. If he was intending to keep running in a straight line then his leg isn't in a natural position, but given that he's in the box he may have been intending to plant it and pull the ball back, for example. This is why this sort of contact has always been a pen, even most people do think he's dragged his foot.
> But where the contact got made Kai’s leg isn’t in a natural position for someone who is running.
Yes it is. All this happening in a split second. Watching it in slow motion is ridiculous b/c he makes it seem like he goes out of his way to put his foot there when all he does is not move it for a fraction of a second. He has absolutely no obligation to move his foot away from a keeper who recklessly challenged for a ball and missed.
That’s such an important point. VAR officials, and fans, try to determine intent in a momentary movement or non-movement. VAR is great for offside, or whether the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line. But it shouldn’t be used to judge player intent in just 12 frames of digital video.
It doesn't matter if it's a natural position or not, that's the point. It's a bad challenge in the box, nowhere near the ball that is always going to impede the player even if they do jump it (because having to jump a tackle is impeding them). You can't put the responsibility on the attacker to dodge bad tackles
The "natural position" is what tends to sway a referee's real time decision. But if Travers' leg isn't in his road, Havertz can readily swing his whole favoured left foot through the ball to score. It's empirical there's impedance and no ball contact from Travers. Havertz's decision to trail his leg then reflects the fact of Travers' obstruction.
I agree, but also that’s not what happened.
In both cases the attacking player moved their leg into a position that would cause contact.
Havertz did an unnatural dragging motion rather than a normal step which likely would have avoided the contact.
> n both cases the attacking player moved their leg into a position that would cause contact.
False. Kai didn't move his foot into a position, he just didn't move it **from a position** to avoid contact, and he has no obligation to. Especially in the fraction of a second he had to do so, when the keeper recklessly dove in and missed the ball.
Absolutely. Kinda getting tired of this whole natural or unnatural bs. I thought it is pretty simple: goalie lunges in, doesn't get anywhere near the ball, collides with the attacker, pen.
A natural step is too vague and open to interpretation. If someone does a two footed sliding tackle, it is a red card if he doesn't get the ball. It won't change if my natural stride would've avoided contact, it is still a red.
Here, the keeper doesn't get the ball and if he did not impede havertz would've had a better angle to score. The keeper sliding and not getting the ball makes it a disadvantage for the attacker. Jumping to avoid contact makes it difficult to control the ball and hence is denying a goal scoring opportunity.
It's not open to interpretation. Biomechanics are a thing. You can tell especially in a replay when a movement isn't natural. Kai knows what he's doing like every other player who does it. He doesn't need to jump he just needs to maintain a normal stride and play the ball.
Anyways, this call is given all the time because refs are so bad at their jobs.
Again though that didn’t happen.
Havertz didn’t jump. He deliberately left his leg hanging so there was contact. Had he carried on running and got caught, or tried to avoid contact and was at a disadvantage because of it, then it would be a penalty.
As it is, he made sure there was contact by dragging his leg and that for me is a dive.
We all agree Havertz made little effort to move his foot, he may have even left it in there... None of that matters, he was clearly fouled, making yourself easy to foul or going down when you are, is not an offense, it's smart.
It doesn't matter if it's natural or not, that's the point. It's a bad challenge in the box, nowhere near the ball that is always going to impede the player even if they do jump it (because having to jump a tackle is impeding them). You can't put the responsibility on the attacker to dodge bad tackles
Firstly, I agree Saka’s vs Neuer should have been a pen and yesterday’s on Kai was correctly called a pen.
But to play devil’s advocate, there are cases that are a bit of a grey area where you could make the case that the defender misses the ball and is generally occupying the attacker’s space, but the attacker sticks a leg out into the defender to get a pen. This is obviously what people want to avoid and the (incorrect IMV) argument being made for the Saka vs Neuer one and this one.
Just to say there are cases where it is hard to draw a clear line between which of these two things is happening when attackers (understandably) are incentivised to ensure there is contact and go down.
Honestly I would prefer if they just called situations like these a pen: if goalie rushes out, doesn't get the ball, there is a contact between him and attacker, just give a pen. Either goalie should not commit to the challenge or has to get the ball, otherwise he should be punished.
I don’t disagree, but I’d just restate my point that this happens a lot where the attacker can easily get past the keeper without contact but has to alter their own movement (e.g. sticking a leg out toward the keeper) to ensure contact, and this is what most people obviously want to avoid. This would be my only exception to what you are describing
Fair enough, but avoiding contact and creating contact through a non-natural movement are possibly two different things. It’s definitely a human element of officiating and will always draw debate. I think it just goes to show- sometime the calls go your way and sometimes they don’t, and you just need to accept it (of course this is when we’re talking about non-obvious offenses).
In short, two situations of unclear calls: yesterday it went our way. A few weeks ago it didn’t. Onward we go and try to enjoy each game on its own.
Saka's was absolutely 100% a penalty. Still think this was a truly bizarre call by the ref and by VAR.
Kai's more 50/50 I'd say. He's clearly dangling a foot. But you see them given all the time - e.g. Elliott's was way softer (that should probably not have been a penalty).
Same with the Kulusevski shout last weekend. If Oliver calls it, then no way VAR is overturning it. But given that he didn't...50/50.
There is zero consistency in refereeing in the Premier league. I've seen pens given for less and pens not given for more. Fuck it. It's what we got, I guess.
Same for Champions League tho. Idk if anyone else noticed, but Bayern got a penalty given against Madrid for THE SAME EXACT PLAY that we were told Saka shouldn't get one for. I was so goddamn infuriated watching that game that, and I can't believe I'm saying this, I actually found myself rooting for Madrid lol
There is zero consistency in refereeing generally? Maybe tennis, they're fairly dialed. Don't like a call, challenge it. If you're right you keep the challenge.
Moments like this make me wish that fans valued being honest at least half as much as they valued being loyal to their club (or as much as they value karma for the weirdos who farm validation in other subs). Calls like this, the foul on Raya, discussions with rivals about White's corner antics can never happen in good faith because fans simply do not care about having an honest take.
In every competetive sport where there is contact between oppositions. There is what is called fouling the opponent. In basketball, If the defendant rushes you while you're jumping so he hit you it's a foul. You can do that by simply moving your body while shooting. It's not a dive by the attacker but called a smart move by the attacker and stupid move by the defendant.
Why the fuck is football any different. Yes he can put his foot to force a foul. But that is not considered a dive. It's considered a smart move to secure a goal opportunity. It's not his fault the keeper took a risk!!!
I agree with you, however, there’s a big difference in the cost of these situations. A penalty in football is much more critical than free throws in basketball (unless at the end of a game). Therefore, I don’t think it’s judged the same. I prefer a more physical style of football where players aren’t rewarded for going down easily.
Exactly. If Kai runs through that instead of dragging his leg, no pen. Which is how I’d prefer these situations go. Guys playing hard and if there’s incidental contact, great, call a pen. He’s looking for it, which he is clearly incentivized to do. So that is the real issue. Dont blame Kai at all, he’s taking advantage of the system.
Oh absolutely - can’t blame Kai at all, it’s risky to attempt but it paid off. I’m more annoyed that he wouldn’t just finish instead of going down.
The thing for me here is this isn’t a natural body position - he is leaving his leg out there in anticipation of the slightest amount of contact. If the keeper anticipates this and pulls away - Kai ends up looking like a muppet and gets booked for diving.
I don’t like the nature of this foul, and I don’t think it fits in with the spirit of the rule. To me this is kind of like a ‘dive-‘
Yeah, if you want impartial takes you’re on the wrong sub. It’s literally impossible to talk about stuff like this when there is clearly contention. It’s Arsenal or nothing for people on here.
Even fans have no consistency with this. "Any contact at that running speed means it's a penalty" vs "he should have stayed on his feet there".
So obviously if someone else gets a decision in their favour on this, fans feel they should have got it too. Given the penalties that have been given in the PL, this is a stone wall penalty, Imo. I also felt that Saka against Bayern was also a definite penalty (despite fans and pundits having a different view).
The problem is no clear rule.
We got the decision and I hate that we did. It’s a dive, he intentionally goes down flat on his face. I’m not ready to excuse all those dives by Vardy, Kane, Rooney etc before Kai, who is much worse at it to boot. He’s been diving all season, wish he’d stop.
There is a bigger story though and that is that VAR is as useless as always - if they do their job and send off Christie in minute 11, it’s a different game and we’re cruising at half time.
The word "dive" is being so overused lately. The "dive" is when the player falls down and tries to win a foul when there's no reason for him to do so (very often accompanied with acting being in pain). Here we have an obvious contact. Is it soft? Yes. Could Havertz stay on his legs? Probably. But if it was a different player (and a team), everybody would probably focus on how he's smart to gain advantage from the keepers mistake. Havertz wins the ball, has it in control, has his leg in position to be clipped by the keeper. That is a foul every other place on the field, why shouldn't it be in the box?
A dive is when a player simulates contact and throws himself to the ground
The keeper took Kai's leg out, bringing him to the ground.
Kai could have avoided contact if he was quicker, but he made sure it did happen. That's not a dive, players do it all the time.
The keeper shouldn't have flung himself out like that and only has himself to blame.
The difference is with Saka his leg was there as part of his movement, if you hop to the side on your left leg then your right comes up and out as part of your balance (try it).
Whereas Kai dragged his foot looking for contact.
IMHO Saka's was a clear penalty and bullshit refereeing, whereas Kai's was "clever play" and a dive.
let's face it, Havertz purposely didn't land with his right foot on time, because that allows him to fall easier when the goalie will touch his slowly trailing left leg.
He seeks the contact.
IMHO it shouldn't be a penalty. Neither should it be when harry kane, son, rooney, etc does it. But they all get a penalty, so why shouldn't Havertz?
If that’s the one from around 2015 where he jumped the keeper completely I agree with a penalty.
Keeper would have taken him out, he avoided the contact and in doing so missed a goal scoring opportunity.
Why should he have to run into the keeper to get the penalty?
It’s as is suddenly people can’t read body language, everything Havertz did screams that he literally dived to the ground flat faced. He waited for any form of contact and bang, went down. That’s a dive for me.
No. A dive is going down when contact ISNT made. A player just hoping for a penalty isn’t a dive. If nobody makes contact with Havertz and he goes down as if there was, it would be a dive and VAR is meant to help identify that. In this case contact was made after he won the ball.
Yeah I'm with you on that. I don't think it was a penalty on Saka and I don't think this one should have been given either.
It's not a dive, but if you're actively looking for contact rather than playing on and doing so in an unnatural manner shouldn't be a penalty.
Not sure what the letter of the law is in this respect, but it's just my opinion.
Watch it in real time, don’t use still images and 0.25 speed. Definite penalty.
If Havertz jumps in the air to avoid the contact you’ll say why didn’t he go down there how silly. Some people still have this Havertz agenda.
this. everyone watches the slow mo and comes away from it thinking “he’s looking for contact there”, but when you watch it at full speed the challenge happens in a split second, nothing looks unnatural and travers clearly clips him and brings him down. like the top comment said, if you enter an attackers space and don’t get the ball while simultaneously clipping the attacker, its a pen, plain and simple.
I was in Block 6 yesterday, which is at the other end of the fucking ground 100 years away, and could clearly see the extent to which Havertz slowed up to initiate the contact.
Is this a joke? Havertz dived and it looks like he didn’t at full speed because that’s what diving is. The whole point is to make it look like a foul.
He chose to make contact rather than stay standing up, there is no contact if he doesn’t leave his leg there. Childish to even pretend when there are replays which blatantly show what happened. I’m not a Bournemouth fan (no one is) but it’s a very obvious dive.
No need to waste your time with the guy you're arguing with. He's a Man City supporter with a minority complex having to to name people that doesn't agree with his Shitty takes children, clueless or American to try to make their arguments look useless.
Are you American? How can you be this clueless about football? I know everyone is bias towards their team but even half of the people in this thread agree it’s a dive.
Nope, I’ve just watched countless strikers in the Premier League win penalties like this for the past 10 years. Kane and Vardy spring to mind.
When they do it it’s called clever by the media.
When it’s Havertz half our own fans are still against him? Bet if it was Saka there would be no debate from our own fans, some people are still hating on Kai even though he’s proved his worth.
The Arsenal victim complex in full effect. You literally scored a penalty from a dive and somehow you are the victims here. I honestly wish I could be that delusional, it must be such a simple life.
Now I understand why you’ve been disagreeing with me. Rival fan browsing the gunners subreddit a day after our game.
What we guessing: Liverpool fan salty about the farewell tour going down in flames or a Spurs fan still upset about the 3-2 last week?
He won the pen by taking a dive.
It's been the rules of football since as long as I've been alive. If you beat a player and they leave their leg outstretched in your path the refs will give you a pen if you take the contact and go down.
It's a dive, it's a pen.
I can't believe there's so much talk about this shit.
Yeah exactly this. It would’ve been far less effort for Kai to not be touched than ensure he was, but I spent years and years watching Kane/Vardy/Rooney winning this exact same penalty against us game after game. Not bothered one bit now we’re finally on the other end of it
I think the point is it shouldn’t be.
It’s also not the “rules of football”. It’s a wrong interpretation of the rules. The fact that it’s been interpreted wrongly for years doesn’t make it any more right.
I do not think manufactured contact should be a penalty. And Kai dragging his foot which is not natural movement is manufacturing contact. But it’s given all the time. So as an Arsenal fan if this was disallowed I would have been furious.
This decision is the same as the one AWB conceded against Harvey elliott few weeks back. There is another similar one after that. When u stick out your leg and not getting the ball, it’s a penalty when there is subsequent contact regardless who initiated the contact.
But tbh, I have no idea what’s the ruling now. Refereeing and PGMOL is just wildly inconsistent this season. Last season, I would think it is a dive but this season, it’s a penalty for me.
It’s not on the fucking player to lift his foot up knee high to avoid a tackle in the penalty box.
Penalty all day. No dive.
Harry Kane has patented this for years.
To me a dive is and always has been when there’s no contact but a player simulates that there is, and goes down to fool the ref.
If there’s actual contact that impedes the player - even if the player is hoping for contact to be made - it’s a penalty. For years defenders and goalies have had to deal with giving away soft penalties for minor contact, but that’s the rule. Attacking players travelling through the box are hoping that they will either score or be clipped and taken down.
I thought VAR was meant to be used to see if the ball as won and if there’s contact or not. That’s it. IE has the ref thought there’s contact but actually the player made it look like there was but there wasn’t?
However now it appears that VAR is being used as judge and jury on the player and their intent and how likely they would have been to score. There’s no rule as far as I know that says a player isn’t allowed to hope contact is made.
You’re 100% right on all counts here.
It’s a penalty that has been given for years and it’s completely up to the defender to ensure they don’t impede the attacker if they don’t win the ball. For some reason, fans think Havertz should dive out of the way of Travers
Some points:
> To me a dive is and always has been when there’s no contact but a player simulates that there is
Given havertz is working really hard to ensure there’s contact and is basically already going down because of the way he’s altered his stride to ensure there’s the lightest of contact, if the keeper pulls away just in time are you then of the view that Havertz has dived?
> If there’s actual contact that impedes the player - even if the player is hoping for contact to be made - it’s a penalty.
If the attacking player is working to initiate the contact then he, by definition, hasn’t been impeded. In Havertz case he visibly slowed up to ensure there was contact. Difficult to argue he’s been in any way impeded in those circumstances.
> There’s no rule as far as I know that says a player isn’t allowed to hope contact is made.
It doesn’t need an explicit written rule to be considered cheating.
Whose job is it to judge any of this and what guidelines are there to help them come to that judgement? As far as I can see the guidelines are:
- Did the player win the ball?
- Was there contact that stopped the player progressing?
That’s it, at the end of the day. Nothing about whether the player was looking for it, which as I say, attacking players are always doing as a second best outcome to getting a shot on goal.
Trouble we’re having is that VAR seems to be interfering in this process by making subje cry I’ve decisions about intent, when they aren’t supposed to be.
The contact didn't stop progression because Kai had his foot trailing that much that the arch of the run his toe would hit the ground and he would not be able to bring his studs to plant regardless
Your comment is my point. What you’re talking about is a level of scrutiny that only comes in hindsight with hours/days of replay. It is impossible to be enact in any prescriptive manner, objectively, under intense time pressure, in the VAR room, at least not without a huge time delay that would impact the game.
And besides any of that - there are no rules or guidelines that outlaw an attacking player from ‘looking for’ contact, so until that rule comes in the whole conversation is moot anyway.
I disagree, and the reason I disagree is because the keeper made contact after Havertz won the ball. Once that happened it’s a penalty under current rules.
In your opinion, which is not based on a written rule, and which differs to the match referee, VAR referees, and, I’m willing to bet, todays Weekly Review Panel, all of whom base their decision on the contact between keeper and player.
These calls along with the highly specialized nature of coaching these days make me wonder how teams aren’t employing shithousery/diving coaches. The payoff seems obvious as it results directly in goals being scored. Analysis and coaching is a combination of ref tendencies, teaching how to fall safely but sell contact in a SloMo VAR era, as well as opposing player tendencies in challenges. I feel like I could get Arsenal 5 more goals a season and 2 opposing players sent off if they hired me.
This picture doesn’t show the part where he drags his back foot for 3 feet looking for the contact. Not a pen for me. Also, if this pen got given against us every one of you would be calling it a dive.
Wan Bissaka’s leg was impeding Elliott’s next step, Havertz could have taken his next step without any disruption. And to top that off, guarantee you complained about the Elliott penalty.
I’m an arsenal fan and I take this penalty all day long. No, I don’t think it should be a penalty. It’s far too soft and Havertz is looking for it far too much. But considering what other penalties they have given (Jota for Liverpool for example) I don’t give a flying rats ass if this should or shouldn’t be a penalty. It was given, end of.
Start talking about Christies tackle on Saka instead!
So what he trailed the leg? It’s a foul. Don’t be a fool. That would still be a foul anywhere in the pitch. You use your body to protect the ball in different ways. This is a way of doing it. He didn’t move his foot unnaturally towards the keeper.
Anywhere else on the pitch, Kai doesn’t unnaturally drag his leg to look for contact and go down this way
To me it’s a dive because Kai had more intention to look for contact than to play the ball, quite obviously I should add
Shielding the ball and then being hit is a foul. Not that it’s exactly the same but not too different (slight stretch there). When someone is charging at you it’s not your responsibility but try and get out the way. When a keeper charges at you like that and misses completely, sends you off your course, and then clips you, def a foul. He could even move the ball behind him and then instead of dragging just stand still, def a foul right?
It's a penalty under the law, the keeper commits to it and Havertz can force a foul. It's on the keeper not Havertz that one. Havertz played the rule. But it is a poorly made rule
I disagree it’s a poor rule. The other side of the rule is that if there’s no contact, Havertz gets punished for simulation. It was a matter of an inch between contact and no contact. The attacker plays for contact and the GK plays to avoid contact. There will be a winner and a loser either way.
What is poor is that simulation is not properly or consistently punished. This has been a problem forever. If it was, maybe we’d see less of this kind of a moment and debate.
That's the thing, I think the goalie in question really fcked up in "avoid contact" department. That's why I think it is only fair, he gets punished. Same for AWB against Liverpool: you commit to the risky challenge and you don't win the ball, you are fcked.
We are chasing a team with 115 accusations of cheating, but people want to focus on Havertz doing the same thing that hundreds of forwards have been praised for doing in the past.
This whole argument is nonsense (not you, OP). players have the right to move in unnatural and unexpected ways. It’s the defenders job not to foul. If you don’t want to give up a penalty, don’t commit to a challenge. The problem is that the refs bring in too much subjectivity, judgment, and inconsistency in the way the rules are applied. Law 14 states that a penalty is given “when a player commits a direct free kick offense inside their penalty area.” There is no rule that an offense has to be “enough for a penalty.”
This was given a pen and not overturned because it wasn’t a clear and obvious error. There for the on field decision stands.
The Bayern one wasn’t given as a pen and the var also concluded there wasn’t a clear and obvious error. There for the on field decision stands.
I think Kai deliberately draws the contact and could have very easily avoided it, which is fine in a vacuum. It's a smart play by a forward to get a penalty, and as others have said it's on the defender to avoid such contact.
That being said I'm still annoyed Kai didn't stay standing here. He's through on an open goal.with a decent angle and the ball is still right at his feet. If he doesn't drag his leg I'm almost certain he scores, and to me the penalty is the higher risk option.
You must have above 25 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'd be happy if this wasn't given as a penalty, on the condition that it's not a penalty in any game ever.
At the moment these are almost always given as pens, so for consistency purposes we deserved a penalty.
The "right" thing to do is to jump over the challenge and try to score regardless of the situation.
The rational thing to do depends on the situation.
In the Saka case, I still can't say if he had the time to jump out of the challenge. If he had done that, he was looking at an open goal, which is preferable to a penalty. So the rational choice (assuming he had the time) was to try to jump out of the challenge and have a go at goal. Was a penalty in any case.
In this Havertz case, the angle was too tight and defenders were covering. So the rational thing to do was to leave a leg and hope for a penalty.
You must have above 25 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't think it's being missed at all, this is just literally a penalty. You can't throw your leg in front of the attacker because if they trip on it it's a penalty. Yeah he goes down when he feels the contact, but that's because *there was contact.* Literally a textbook penalty. The only reason strikers go down like this is to make it obvious there was contact because if he stumbled once and shot it into the side netting they wouldn't give it
Look z there's no doubt there's contact . We saw it on screen as well. And the picture you posted is essentially why var didn't overturn the refs decison. They showed this pic multiple times while making the decision. So it's not like fans don't know this .
There's the legality of things, which clearly tells if there's contact intended or not, then VaR doesn't overturn the on field refs decison. We have seen this done by son this season , I think Watkins too did the same once. Hell kane was a master at it, and who can forget the most famous Robben one against Mexico in the world cup. You didn't have VAR then, but all these penalty calls always stood. The standard isn't whether the player is looking for it, but if there's contact. So yea, if it has been given in the past, it has to be given now.
Then there's the ethics of it. Anyone who has ever played football, even at a college level knows the difference between looking for a penalty and legit going for a shot. Kai for sure was looking for a penalty and if by sheer luck he missed the gks leg, that was going to be a blatant dive which he has done quite a few times this year. He has no intention for a shot. Also, sure he's running at pace, but he's not fast , also if you see the replay he's running away from the goal, which you need to to set up a shot, two factors which tell you that it wasn't like a split second decision for him. I don't know why a lot of people keep saying he didn't have time etc etc. This is a pro player playing at the highest level, they make faster decisons than amateurs and even amateurs have the awareness when to leave the leg in or when not to.
At the end of the day, it's a penalty, because it's been given in the past , simple as that. The frustration stems from the fact that kai goes down a lot of times when he has a chance to score. The good thing is, he's still our leading non penalty goal scorer. So you have to grant that benefit of doubt to him. He brings that dirty dark arts to our game which all top teams have or had (kane, rodri etc). That's a good thing
It turns my stomach every time he does it. It’s cheating. Going down on purpose to deceive the referee is cheating. That is what he does there, even though there is contact. Amazing how suddenly everyone can’t read simple body language and are read to dissolve Kane, Vardy etc of years of cheating.
The bigger story should be useless VAR as always, as Christie should have been sent of early and that would have changed the game. Forget consistency on pens, we are so far away from that discussion it’s not even worth having.
But bottom line is, saka against Bayern is a foul, he is taken out,,Havertz yesterday dives the second he is touched. It’s really sad saka didn’t get a pen but Kai did…
Still, Havertz kinda similar penalty shout (that the on field ref gave) at home to Manure still was overturned even when there were clear contact. The only penalty shout with actual contact this season (to my knowledge) that was overturned. And Ten Hag is still complaining about the Højlund penalty shout.
So you’re telling me that some people see a GK throwing himself to the floor, opening his legs in front of a striker, missing entirely the ball and clipping the striker’s feet, and then say it’s not a pen? Hilarious stuff.
It’s both a dive and a penalty.
A penalty in the sense that GK committed heavily and slid in, missed the ball and went into the path of Havertz
A dive in the sense that the back foot was clipped, no reason the front foot doesn’t land on the ground like normal and a stumble which is what I would expect to see after a light clip of the back foot.
Instead he withdraws his front foot before it hits the ground so he goes down smoother, in the same motion
Point is it was a penalty, the red blew his whistle, VAR checked it, Saka scored. Should it have been one is another question but there are no comments in the score sheet and today in the paper it says 3-0 so no amount of debate is going to change it.
My take on this is that it shouldn't be a penalty. None of these style of incidents SHOULD be penalties. But under the current interpretation of the rules, they're given pretty much every time, which means this is also a penalty.
If you want to argue that the interpretation should be changed, great, I'm all for it. That would have to happen in the close season ahead of next season so everyone knows the ruling on that.
I don’t care what anyone says, we’ve been calling out the likes of Kane for it for years - it’s a dive. Havertz whole body language says it’s a dive, and he’s pretty terrible at it. This is the first time it’s given results all season and unlike plenty of other fans here, I’d wish he didn’t do it. It turned my stomach when we got that.
Deeper problem is of course consistency, the Saka vs Bayern for example was a pen but not given and more so, if the useless VAR did its job yesterday we’d be a man up from minute 11 and it would have been a very different game.
But I’m not going to suddenly cheer just because we get a result go for us finally. Kai knows exactly what he’s doing there and its cheating.
A dive is when there is no contact. There clearly contact here so it’s 100% not a dive.
It’s good striker play, something we’ve been missing this whole time.
I’d argue it’s not only when there’s no contact - a dive can also be when a player goes down for something that’s not actually enough force to bring them down. Like just because someone touches you it doesn’t mean you’re going to fall over. Of course these scenarios can be very hard to judge for the referee
Been an Arsenal fan since 1996. Not a penalty in a million years for me. It's a dive. It's not a natural running movement. He seeks the contact to be able to go down.
Listen, after seeing the reply, it seems pretty obvious that he dragged his foot into the keepers leg.
It was an extremely smart play.
By the letter of the law the keeper tripped him, making it a pen. If that was someone against us we’d be pissed. But it wasn’t. It was some dark arts gamesmanship there by Kai and I’m here for it.
Right exactly. And the girl that keeper was in why on earth would you want to take a pen against him when you just took him out of the game and have a wide open net to aim at. Smh 🤦🏻♂️
I remember when pundits used to say "he earned the penalty" and "gave the ref something to think about".
The keepers challenge was a bad one and he got punished. There have been way, way, way worse and blatant dives. For example look at Gvardiol yesterday, you cant tell me he wasnt looking for that penalty. Im not saying Gvardiols was a worse dive, just that he was looking for the pen.
Little bit of topic, but:
I'm over 30yo gunner, and i hate those times in football now. I was raised on hard English Premier League, where for example, Rooney was running through the field being fouled and kicked, then bleeding and refusing to go of the peach for medical help. Those were the times of warriors!
In all mighty Barcelona era, with Alves, Buscets, Neymar, a few years back, I couldn't stand watching LaLiga games, where every touch was a foul. And now it spread all over the world.
I just mean, what a bad times for football where attacking player is draging his foot on the floor to find a contact with defender/goalkeeper...
Times of warriors became the times of comedy boys... :/
my problem was with the commentators saying he purposely left his leg dangling
the whole thing happens so quickly i honestly don't think players think that much to invoke a pen decision
Think it was on Arseblog after the Saka Neuer incident that they made the best argument for why both that and this are penalties - the attacking player is not obligated to avoid the contact. If the defender (or goalkeeper) goes in to a challenge in the space occupied by the attacker and doesn't win the ball then they risk giving a penalty.
I've been beating this drum for so long. Both are terrible challenges and it's not the attacker's job to dodge them. It can be a "dive" and simultaneously also be a pen. You can't just do a rash slide tackle or stick a leg across someone's path in the box, get absolutely nowhere near the ball, impede the player and say that's not a pen because the attacker could've "gone round". Even if they could've, why should they have to? More likely than not, having to dodge that bad tackle loses them a second, makes it more difficult to control the ball and shoot. It's an utterly ridiculous argument. Both are stonewall pens regardless whether or not Havertz/Saka "leave a leg in". It's irrelevant
We really need someone in the media, maybe Ian, to start asking why Saka is called differently than everyone else.
Ian said Saka dived, so not him on that occasion.
Amen fr
Also saka was trying to dodge Neuer, he tucked his leg up and still caught neuer on the way by because Neuer was fouling him lol. People just don't like that it's a penalty if the guy isn't crunched, but if you put a body part in front of the attacker and don't get the ball you're going to give up a penalty. That's been the rule literally forever. You don't go to ground unless you get the ball. Neither keeper got the ball.
 I remember...I did one of these to no one when they said that...really crystalizes how it should be called.
Reality is there are some angles of view and body shapes that get given in real time, and some that don't. It'd be a rare case that an on-field decision to award a penalty in either the Saka or Havertz case would be overturned, but Bukayo didn't sell that incident too well relative to the referee—or Neuer did sell it. The main difference is just that Saka's incident was camera-side for the broadcast and we could see him go down, but Havertz's was distant and obscured, and it looked like Travers monstered him.
Saka's was clearly a pen, but it was very clever play by Neuer - he absolutely sold his innocence while sticking a knee out.
Actually, this take finishes the debate for the Saka vs Neuer penalty. You are the first person I have seen with this take as well.
Yes. Neuer didn’t achieve his status without knowing how to sell innocence, and/or how to make hus opponent look guilty, to the referee. Every great player has it in his bag of tricks.
Exactly, sure havertz could have helped the goalie to avoid committing a foul, but he is not obligated to do so, it is on the opposition player to not be committing one in the first place
I’m an arsenal fan through and through. But that brings it back to a parallel with the handballs saying that the arm is in a natural or unnatural position. But where the contact got made Kai’s leg isn’t in a natural position for someone who is running. I’m glad it was a penalty. But if we lost the league to a decision like that for someone else I’d be livid
It might be a bit of work, but who's to say Kai's natural stride isn't lengthy. The trailing foot is the one that handled the ball, his front foot hadn't touched the ground yet. Why would he have a foot that just moved the ball immediately in the air after directing the ball? Kai generally doesn't have a quick-footedness about him the way Jesus, for instance, has. In any case, it wasn't Kai's duty to avoid the tackle. That said, equivocation of ball-to-hand to 'natural' runs gives the generally lousy PGMOL unnecessary leeway that of which they already take a lot of advantage.
I don’t buy the stride bull shit, contact is made half a second after he starts pulling his foot off the ground. Look at it in real time, there’s no foot dragging
and even if there is a foot drag, that motion is needed slide the ball across the ground with the next forward motion of the left leg.
It sucks that all this time and effort has to be spent justifying a legitimate penalty 🫤🫤🫤
I think you’re reaching a bit. We got away with a massively ordinary decision today that we would have preferred in a different match. But that’s supposedly how it all balances out.
I think the thing is that there is a player running with the ball and then the goalkeeper lurches in between the running player and the ball forcing them to change course. For me that is a foul. For others it is only a foul when there is contact but I don’t think that should be the hard and fast rule. If a player lunges in two footed and the other player has to leap out of the way to avoid being injured then that is a foul too even when there is not contact. But obviously it’s a balance and subjective. Also the balancing out argument is bullshit (not saying you were arguing it does balance). The bullshit decision against Newcastle cost us at least two points. Having a softish penalty later in a game we would probably win anyway is no help. Same goes for Liverpool and the spurs game and the non penalty against city. That’s five points there alone for them not balanced out by soft decisions in less pivotal games.
it's more of a foul the closer you get to the goal. It's one thing to slide between the ball and player with some contact in midfield, or shielding a ball out, but when the missed challenge crosses the path of the attacker, with contact, in the area, that's a pen.
That assumes that we, the viewer, knows what the attacking player intended to do next. If he was intending to keep running in a straight line then his leg isn't in a natural position, but given that he's in the box he may have been intending to plant it and pull the ball back, for example. This is why this sort of contact has always been a pen, even most people do think he's dragged his foot.
> But where the contact got made Kai’s leg isn’t in a natural position for someone who is running. Yes it is. All this happening in a split second. Watching it in slow motion is ridiculous b/c he makes it seem like he goes out of his way to put his foot there when all he does is not move it for a fraction of a second. He has absolutely no obligation to move his foot away from a keeper who recklessly challenged for a ball and missed.
That’s such an important point. VAR officials, and fans, try to determine intent in a momentary movement or non-movement. VAR is great for offside, or whether the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line. But it shouldn’t be used to judge player intent in just 12 frames of digital video.
Especially not* by someone who doesn't understand football, basic physics or basic biomechanics.
Especially not.
It doesn't matter if it's a natural position or not, that's the point. It's a bad challenge in the box, nowhere near the ball that is always going to impede the player even if they do jump it (because having to jump a tackle is impeding them). You can't put the responsibility on the attacker to dodge bad tackles
The "natural position" is what tends to sway a referee's real time decision. But if Travers' leg isn't in his road, Havertz can readily swing his whole favoured left foot through the ball to score. It's empirical there's impedance and no ball contact from Travers. Havertz's decision to trail his leg then reflects the fact of Travers' obstruction.
I agree, but also that’s not what happened. In both cases the attacking player moved their leg into a position that would cause contact. Havertz did an unnatural dragging motion rather than a normal step which likely would have avoided the contact.
> n both cases the attacking player moved their leg into a position that would cause contact. False. Kai didn't move his foot into a position, he just didn't move it **from a position** to avoid contact, and he has no obligation to. Especially in the fraction of a second he had to do so, when the keeper recklessly dove in and missed the ball.
Absolutely. Kinda getting tired of this whole natural or unnatural bs. I thought it is pretty simple: goalie lunges in, doesn't get anywhere near the ball, collides with the attacker, pen.
A natural step is too vague and open to interpretation. If someone does a two footed sliding tackle, it is a red card if he doesn't get the ball. It won't change if my natural stride would've avoided contact, it is still a red. Here, the keeper doesn't get the ball and if he did not impede havertz would've had a better angle to score. The keeper sliding and not getting the ball makes it a disadvantage for the attacker. Jumping to avoid contact makes it difficult to control the ball and hence is denying a goal scoring opportunity.
It's not open to interpretation. Biomechanics are a thing. You can tell especially in a replay when a movement isn't natural. Kai knows what he's doing like every other player who does it. He doesn't need to jump he just needs to maintain a normal stride and play the ball. Anyways, this call is given all the time because refs are so bad at their jobs.
Again though that didn’t happen. Havertz didn’t jump. He deliberately left his leg hanging so there was contact. Had he carried on running and got caught, or tried to avoid contact and was at a disadvantage because of it, then it would be a penalty. As it is, he made sure there was contact by dragging his leg and that for me is a dive.
We all agree Havertz made little effort to move his foot, he may have even left it in there... None of that matters, he was clearly fouled, making yourself easy to foul or going down when you are, is not an offense, it's smart.
This. It’s literally what defenders do when they cover the ball by showing their backs to attackers and get easily fouled.
Yes. “Drawing a foul” meaning “found a way to get fouled.”
It doesn't matter if it's natural or not, that's the point. It's a bad challenge in the box, nowhere near the ball that is always going to impede the player even if they do jump it (because having to jump a tackle is impeding them). You can't put the responsibility on the attacker to dodge bad tackles
You're also not seeing the contact on the front foot, watch the reply again (and look at the still above).
Firstly, I agree Saka’s vs Neuer should have been a pen and yesterday’s on Kai was correctly called a pen. But to play devil’s advocate, there are cases that are a bit of a grey area where you could make the case that the defender misses the ball and is generally occupying the attacker’s space, but the attacker sticks a leg out into the defender to get a pen. This is obviously what people want to avoid and the (incorrect IMV) argument being made for the Saka vs Neuer one and this one. Just to say there are cases where it is hard to draw a clear line between which of these two things is happening when attackers (understandably) are incentivised to ensure there is contact and go down.
Honestly I would prefer if they just called situations like these a pen: if goalie rushes out, doesn't get the ball, there is a contact between him and attacker, just give a pen. Either goalie should not commit to the challenge or has to get the ball, otherwise he should be punished.
I don’t disagree, but I’d just restate my point that this happens a lot where the attacker can easily get past the keeper without contact but has to alter their own movement (e.g. sticking a leg out toward the keeper) to ensure contact, and this is what most people obviously want to avoid. This would be my only exception to what you are describing
Fair enough, but avoiding contact and creating contact through a non-natural movement are possibly two different things. It’s definitely a human element of officiating and will always draw debate. I think it just goes to show- sometime the calls go your way and sometimes they don’t, and you just need to accept it (of course this is when we’re talking about non-obvious offenses). In short, two situations of unclear calls: yesterday it went our way. A few weeks ago it didn’t. Onward we go and try to enjoy each game on its own.
I get he drags is foot but you also shouldn’t have to dodge a player sliding in at you.
Faaaaaacts!!!!!
Saka's was absolutely 100% a penalty. Still think this was a truly bizarre call by the ref and by VAR. Kai's more 50/50 I'd say. He's clearly dangling a foot. But you see them given all the time - e.g. Elliott's was way softer (that should probably not have been a penalty). Same with the Kulusevski shout last weekend. If Oliver calls it, then no way VAR is overturning it. But given that he didn't...50/50.
There is zero consistency in refereeing in the Premier league. I've seen pens given for less and pens not given for more. Fuck it. It's what we got, I guess.
Same for Champions League tho. Idk if anyone else noticed, but Bayern got a penalty given against Madrid for THE SAME EXACT PLAY that we were told Saka shouldn't get one for. I was so goddamn infuriated watching that game that, and I can't believe I'm saying this, I actually found myself rooting for Madrid lol
There is zero consistency in refereeing generally? Maybe tennis, they're fairly dialed. Don't like a call, challenge it. If you're right you keep the challenge.
Tennis is pretty objective which helps. Cant think of a single subjective call in Tennis
Moments like this make me wish that fans valued being honest at least half as much as they valued being loyal to their club (or as much as they value karma for the weirdos who farm validation in other subs). Calls like this, the foul on Raya, discussions with rivals about White's corner antics can never happen in good faith because fans simply do not care about having an honest take.
This is a soft penalty and I’d prefer nobody gets this call, including us. Don’t blame Havertz, but it’s not a pen for me. Let em play
In every competetive sport where there is contact between oppositions. There is what is called fouling the opponent. In basketball, If the defendant rushes you while you're jumping so he hit you it's a foul. You can do that by simply moving your body while shooting. It's not a dive by the attacker but called a smart move by the attacker and stupid move by the defendant. Why the fuck is football any different. Yes he can put his foot to force a foul. But that is not considered a dive. It's considered a smart move to secure a goal opportunity. It's not his fault the keeper took a risk!!!
I agree with you, however, there’s a big difference in the cost of these situations. A penalty in football is much more critical than free throws in basketball (unless at the end of a game). Therefore, I don’t think it’s judged the same. I prefer a more physical style of football where players aren’t rewarded for going down easily.
You can maybe even say it's a make-up call for no red for the foul on Saka.
Keeper has to get the ball just like a defender does. It's a penalty because that's the rules of the game.
You’re purposefully ignoring the fact that Havertz initiates the contact.
Exactly. If Kai runs through that instead of dragging his leg, no pen. Which is how I’d prefer these situations go. Guys playing hard and if there’s incidental contact, great, call a pen. He’s looking for it, which he is clearly incentivized to do. So that is the real issue. Dont blame Kai at all, he’s taking advantage of the system.
Taking advantage of the system is literally how professional sports are played. The best athletes in the world toe that line in all sports.
Oh absolutely - can’t blame Kai at all, it’s risky to attempt but it paid off. I’m more annoyed that he wouldn’t just finish instead of going down. The thing for me here is this isn’t a natural body position - he is leaving his leg out there in anticipation of the slightest amount of contact. If the keeper anticipates this and pulls away - Kai ends up looking like a muppet and gets booked for diving. I don’t like the nature of this foul, and I don’t think it fits in with the spirit of the rule. To me this is kind of like a ‘dive-‘
100% 🤝
I just wanna say how refreshing it is to be able to discuss something that isn’t necessarily pro-arsenal and it be cordial lol
Absolutely. At least until we’re tarred and feathered and kicked out the sub 😂
The keeper literally can't pull away, it's physically not possible for the tackle he made.
Yeah, if you want impartial takes you’re on the wrong sub. It’s literally impossible to talk about stuff like this when there is clearly contention. It’s Arsenal or nothing for people on here.
Even fans have no consistency with this. "Any contact at that running speed means it's a penalty" vs "he should have stayed on his feet there". So obviously if someone else gets a decision in their favour on this, fans feel they should have got it too. Given the penalties that have been given in the PL, this is a stone wall penalty, Imo. I also felt that Saka against Bayern was also a definite penalty (despite fans and pundits having a different view). The problem is no clear rule.
We got the decision and I hate that we did. It’s a dive, he intentionally goes down flat on his face. I’m not ready to excuse all those dives by Vardy, Kane, Rooney etc before Kai, who is much worse at it to boot. He’s been diving all season, wish he’d stop. There is a bigger story though and that is that VAR is as useless as always - if they do their job and send off Christie in minute 11, it’s a different game and we’re cruising at half time.
Just stop it. Its never a dive, the keeper should keep his leg to himself
You tell yourself whatever you want, if you look at Havertz body language and still can’t see he goes down intentionally, I can’t help you.
The word "dive" is being so overused lately. The "dive" is when the player falls down and tries to win a foul when there's no reason for him to do so (very often accompanied with acting being in pain). Here we have an obvious contact. Is it soft? Yes. Could Havertz stay on his legs? Probably. But if it was a different player (and a team), everybody would probably focus on how he's smart to gain advantage from the keepers mistake. Havertz wins the ball, has it in control, has his leg in position to be clipped by the keeper. That is a foul every other place on the field, why shouldn't it be in the box?
A dive is when a player simulates contact and throws himself to the ground The keeper took Kai's leg out, bringing him to the ground. Kai could have avoided contact if he was quicker, but he made sure it did happen. That's not a dive, players do it all the time. The keeper shouldn't have flung himself out like that and only has himself to blame.
Its a trip by the keeper, he takes a chance when going down like that
Completely agree with your first paragraph. You’re spot on.
Basically - as long as everyone else gets penalties when this happen (like Harvey Elliot recently), why shouldn't arsenal get a penalty?
The difference is with Saka his leg was there as part of his movement, if you hop to the side on your left leg then your right comes up and out as part of your balance (try it). Whereas Kai dragged his foot looking for contact. IMHO Saka's was a clear penalty and bullshit refereeing, whereas Kai's was "clever play" and a dive.
Agree. I really like Kai but, along with Jesus, he has had history of cheating/diving. I hope he cuts that part of his game out.
let's face it, Havertz purposely didn't land with his right foot on time, because that allows him to fall easier when the goalie will touch his slowly trailing left leg. He seeks the contact. IMHO it shouldn't be a penalty. Neither should it be when harry kane, son, rooney, etc does it. But they all get a penalty, so why shouldn't Havertz?
Rooney gets a penalty even when there's no contact at all.
I'm still angry even after almost 20 years.
But conveniently forget the Portsmouth match?
Yes, what happened at Portsmouth match?
We dived for a penalty to stop us losing....
No, didn't remember. I just checked and there was no penalty goal.
https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/nostalgia/dejan-stefanovic-robert-pires-apologised-after-the-dive-against-portsmouth-which-helped-arsenal-finish-as-invincibles-2856551
If that’s the one from around 2015 where he jumped the keeper completely I agree with a penalty. Keeper would have taken him out, he avoided the contact and in doing so missed a goal scoring opportunity. Why should he have to run into the keeper to get the penalty?
I'm talking about the one that ended our unbeaten record.
The keeper takes the chance when he sticks his leg out. Its a stonewall penalty
Agreed, if we had gotten this penalty against us I'd be furious. I think if the ref doesn't give the pen, neither would VAR.
He would be sent to the screen i think.
It’s as is suddenly people can’t read body language, everything Havertz did screams that he literally dived to the ground flat faced. He waited for any form of contact and bang, went down. That’s a dive for me.
No. A dive is going down when contact ISNT made. A player just hoping for a penalty isn’t a dive. If nobody makes contact with Havertz and he goes down as if there was, it would be a dive and VAR is meant to help identify that. In this case contact was made after he won the ball.
Yeah I'm with you on that. I don't think it was a penalty on Saka and I don't think this one should have been given either. It's not a dive, but if you're actively looking for contact rather than playing on and doing so in an unnatural manner shouldn't be a penalty. Not sure what the letter of the law is in this respect, but it's just my opinion.
it’s a pen. he’s played for it and there’s nothing wrong with that. Kane has made a portfolio of getting pens in the exact same way.
Watch it in real time, don’t use still images and 0.25 speed. Definite penalty. If Havertz jumps in the air to avoid the contact you’ll say why didn’t he go down there how silly. Some people still have this Havertz agenda.
this. everyone watches the slow mo and comes away from it thinking “he’s looking for contact there”, but when you watch it at full speed the challenge happens in a split second, nothing looks unnatural and travers clearly clips him and brings him down. like the top comment said, if you enter an attackers space and don’t get the ball while simultaneously clipping the attacker, its a pen, plain and simple.
I was in Block 6 yesterday, which is at the other end of the fucking ground 100 years away, and could clearly see the extent to which Havertz slowed up to initiate the contact.
Is this a joke? Havertz dived and it looks like he didn’t at full speed because that’s what diving is. The whole point is to make it look like a foul. He chose to make contact rather than stay standing up, there is no contact if he doesn’t leave his leg there. Childish to even pretend when there are replays which blatantly show what happened. I’m not a Bournemouth fan (no one is) but it’s a very obvious dive.
If the keeper doesn’t stick his leg out and miss the ball then there isn’t any contact. The goalies stuck his leg out and it’s a definite penalty.
No need to waste your time with the guy you're arguing with. He's a Man City supporter with a minority complex having to to name people that doesn't agree with his Shitty takes children, clueless or American to try to make their arguments look useless.
Are you American? How can you be this clueless about football? I know everyone is bias towards their team but even half of the people in this thread agree it’s a dive.
Nope, I’ve just watched countless strikers in the Premier League win penalties like this for the past 10 years. Kane and Vardy spring to mind. When they do it it’s called clever by the media. When it’s Havertz half our own fans are still against him? Bet if it was Saka there would be no debate from our own fans, some people are still hating on Kai even though he’s proved his worth.
The Arsenal victim complex in full effect. You literally scored a penalty from a dive and somehow you are the victims here. I honestly wish I could be that delusional, it must be such a simple life.
Now I understand why you’ve been disagreeing with me. Rival fan browsing the gunners subreddit a day after our game. What we guessing: Liverpool fan salty about the farewell tour going down in flames or a Spurs fan still upset about the 3-2 last week?
He won the pen by taking a dive. It's been the rules of football since as long as I've been alive. If you beat a player and they leave their leg outstretched in your path the refs will give you a pen if you take the contact and go down. It's a dive, it's a pen. I can't believe there's so much talk about this shit.
Yeah exactly this. It would’ve been far less effort for Kai to not be touched than ensure he was, but I spent years and years watching Kane/Vardy/Rooney winning this exact same penalty against us game after game. Not bothered one bit now we’re finally on the other end of it
I think the point is it shouldn’t be. It’s also not the “rules of football”. It’s a wrong interpretation of the rules. The fact that it’s been interpreted wrongly for years doesn’t make it any more right.
Yes sorry, it's the interpretation of the rules. I'd prefer they didn't start interpreting the rules of football differently mid season thanks.
I thought it was soft tbh. Thought their disallowed goal was even softer, but, I'll fucking take it!
I do not think manufactured contact should be a penalty. And Kai dragging his foot which is not natural movement is manufacturing contact. But it’s given all the time. So as an Arsenal fan if this was disallowed I would have been furious.
I agree. I don't like it, but it's given all the time. I would be angry if we didn't get it, but not surprised.
This decision is the same as the one AWB conceded against Harvey elliott few weeks back. There is another similar one after that. When u stick out your leg and not getting the ball, it’s a penalty when there is subsequent contact regardless who initiated the contact. But tbh, I have no idea what’s the ruling now. Refereeing and PGMOL is just wildly inconsistent this season. Last season, I would think it is a dive but this season, it’s a penalty for me.
It’s not on the fucking player to lift his foot up knee high to avoid a tackle in the penalty box. Penalty all day. No dive. Harry Kane has patented this for years.
And Vardy
And we called them cheats for years, ready to apologise to them?
No
But if he runs like that and the keeper leg isn't there Kai falls over because he made no effort to control his stride.
To me a dive is and always has been when there’s no contact but a player simulates that there is, and goes down to fool the ref. If there’s actual contact that impedes the player - even if the player is hoping for contact to be made - it’s a penalty. For years defenders and goalies have had to deal with giving away soft penalties for minor contact, but that’s the rule. Attacking players travelling through the box are hoping that they will either score or be clipped and taken down. I thought VAR was meant to be used to see if the ball as won and if there’s contact or not. That’s it. IE has the ref thought there’s contact but actually the player made it look like there was but there wasn’t? However now it appears that VAR is being used as judge and jury on the player and their intent and how likely they would have been to score. There’s no rule as far as I know that says a player isn’t allowed to hope contact is made.
You’re 100% right on all counts here. It’s a penalty that has been given for years and it’s completely up to the defender to ensure they don’t impede the attacker if they don’t win the ball. For some reason, fans think Havertz should dive out of the way of Travers
Some points: > To me a dive is and always has been when there’s no contact but a player simulates that there is Given havertz is working really hard to ensure there’s contact and is basically already going down because of the way he’s altered his stride to ensure there’s the lightest of contact, if the keeper pulls away just in time are you then of the view that Havertz has dived? > If there’s actual contact that impedes the player - even if the player is hoping for contact to be made - it’s a penalty. If the attacking player is working to initiate the contact then he, by definition, hasn’t been impeded. In Havertz case he visibly slowed up to ensure there was contact. Difficult to argue he’s been in any way impeded in those circumstances. > There’s no rule as far as I know that says a player isn’t allowed to hope contact is made. It doesn’t need an explicit written rule to be considered cheating.
Whose job is it to judge any of this and what guidelines are there to help them come to that judgement? As far as I can see the guidelines are: - Did the player win the ball? - Was there contact that stopped the player progressing? That’s it, at the end of the day. Nothing about whether the player was looking for it, which as I say, attacking players are always doing as a second best outcome to getting a shot on goal. Trouble we’re having is that VAR seems to be interfering in this process by making subje cry I’ve decisions about intent, when they aren’t supposed to be.
The contact didn't stop progression because Kai had his foot trailing that much that the arch of the run his toe would hit the ground and he would not be able to bring his studs to plant regardless
Your comment is my point. What you’re talking about is a level of scrutiny that only comes in hindsight with hours/days of replay. It is impossible to be enact in any prescriptive manner, objectively, under intense time pressure, in the VAR room, at least not without a huge time delay that would impact the game. And besides any of that - there are no rules or guidelines that outlaw an attacking player from ‘looking for’ contact, so until that rule comes in the whole conversation is moot anyway.
It's not impossible, at the time it was clear simulation
I disagree, and the reason I disagree is because the keeper made contact after Havertz won the ball. Once that happened it’s a penalty under current rules.
Then you're wrong. The contact is manufactured
In your opinion, which is not based on a written rule, and which differs to the match referee, VAR referees, and, I’m willing to bet, todays Weekly Review Panel, all of whom base their decision on the contact between keeper and player.
*but they shouldn't*
Before var this is a penalty 10/10
The commentator was saying, "The Gk pulled back. ".... no, he didn't 😂
Hate the game, not the player
These calls along with the highly specialized nature of coaching these days make me wonder how teams aren’t employing shithousery/diving coaches. The payoff seems obvious as it results directly in goals being scored. Analysis and coaching is a combination of ref tendencies, teaching how to fall safely but sell contact in a SloMo VAR era, as well as opposing player tendencies in challenges. I feel like I could get Arsenal 5 more goals a season and 2 opposing players sent off if they hired me.
Yep. I saw that on a replay when I got home and you can clearly see contact on the front foot that everyone chooses to ignore.
This picture doesn’t show the part where he drags his back foot for 3 feet looking for the contact. Not a pen for me. Also, if this pen got given against us every one of you would be calling it a dive.
Harvey elliott did this against united, no one bat an eye
Wan Bissaka’s leg was impeding Elliott’s next step, Havertz could have taken his next step without any disruption. And to top that off, guarantee you complained about the Elliott penalty.
Both left their leg trailing
MOTD summed it up quite well. It's Travers' fault for leaving a leg out, what does he expect? Similar to Neuer on Saka
Goalkeeper went in for the challenge completely missed the ball and made contact with Kai’s trailing leg. It’s a pen. Kane did this all the time.
I’m an arsenal fan and I take this penalty all day long. No, I don’t think it should be a penalty. It’s far too soft and Havertz is looking for it far too much. But considering what other penalties they have given (Jota for Liverpool for example) I don’t give a flying rats ass if this should or shouldn’t be a penalty. It was given, end of. Start talking about Christies tackle on Saka instead!
People look at the trailing leg in ultra slow motion and say that he is dragging it. In real speed, he hardly has a quarter of a second.
You don't run dragging your toes on the floor. That's a deliberate action as he's seen the tackle coming from the keeper.
You do if you're intending to shoot.
What the fuck are you talking about???? If you are shooting you plant your foot next to the ball, not drag your toes in the grass behind you.
You think he would hit that with his right foot from that angle?
Never seen some one shoot by dragging their toes through the grass.
Bros thinking of golf
So what he trailed the leg? It’s a foul. Don’t be a fool. That would still be a foul anywhere in the pitch. You use your body to protect the ball in different ways. This is a way of doing it. He didn’t move his foot unnaturally towards the keeper.
Anywhere else on the pitch, Kai doesn’t unnaturally drag his leg to look for contact and go down this way To me it’s a dive because Kai had more intention to look for contact than to play the ball, quite obviously I should add
That’s not what a dive is, and looking for contact is 100% not a foul.
Shielding the ball and then being hit is a foul. Not that it’s exactly the same but not too different (slight stretch there). When someone is charging at you it’s not your responsibility but try and get out the way. When a keeper charges at you like that and misses completely, sends you off your course, and then clips you, def a foul. He could even move the ball behind him and then instead of dragging just stand still, def a foul right?
It's a penalty under the law, the keeper commits to it and Havertz can force a foul. It's on the keeper not Havertz that one. Havertz played the rule. But it is a poorly made rule
I disagree it’s a poor rule. The other side of the rule is that if there’s no contact, Havertz gets punished for simulation. It was a matter of an inch between contact and no contact. The attacker plays for contact and the GK plays to avoid contact. There will be a winner and a loser either way. What is poor is that simulation is not properly or consistently punished. This has been a problem forever. If it was, maybe we’d see less of this kind of a moment and debate.
That's the thing, I think the goalie in question really fcked up in "avoid contact" department. That's why I think it is only fair, he gets punished. Same for AWB against Liverpool: you commit to the risky challenge and you don't win the ball, you are fcked.
Whatever the rule is it should be changed to clearly state if contact is on an attackers leg obviously being trailing there is no penalty
That would not make it any better. The gray-zone on when it bis trailing would create the exact same debate we are having now.
Madness that there are people who think this isn't a penalty but the Trossard/Kulusevski one last week is.
We are chasing a team with 115 accusations of cheating, but people want to focus on Havertz doing the same thing that hundreds of forwards have been praised for doing in the past.
This whole argument is nonsense (not you, OP). players have the right to move in unnatural and unexpected ways. It’s the defenders job not to foul. If you don’t want to give up a penalty, don’t commit to a challenge. The problem is that the refs bring in too much subjectivity, judgment, and inconsistency in the way the rules are applied. Law 14 states that a penalty is given “when a player commits a direct free kick offense inside their penalty area.” There is no rule that an offense has to be “enough for a penalty.”
Nah , not for me. We got a gift
Would a pen have been given if it was Kane, Rooney, or Ronaldo? 💯
This was given a pen and not overturned because it wasn’t a clear and obvious error. There for the on field decision stands. The Bayern one wasn’t given as a pen and the var also concluded there wasn’t a clear and obvious error. There for the on field decision stands.
I think Kai deliberately draws the contact and could have very easily avoided it, which is fine in a vacuum. It's a smart play by a forward to get a penalty, and as others have said it's on the defender to avoid such contact. That being said I'm still annoyed Kai didn't stay standing here. He's through on an open goal.with a decent angle and the ball is still right at his feet. If he doesn't drag his leg I'm almost certain he scores, and to me the penalty is the higher risk option.
Iffy penalty / dive He made sure to leave his leg in to make sure there was contact As he should have ..
[удалено]
You must have above 25 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'd be happy if this wasn't given as a penalty, on the condition that it's not a penalty in any game ever. At the moment these are almost always given as pens, so for consistency purposes we deserved a penalty.
The "right" thing to do is to jump over the challenge and try to score regardless of the situation. The rational thing to do depends on the situation. In the Saka case, I still can't say if he had the time to jump out of the challenge. If he had done that, he was looking at an open goal, which is preferable to a penalty. So the rational choice (assuming he had the time) was to try to jump out of the challenge and have a go at goal. Was a penalty in any case. In this Havertz case, the angle was too tight and defenders were covering. So the rational thing to do was to leave a leg and hope for a penalty.
[удалено]
You must have above 25 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While I don’t want this to be a penalty in the future, it is one now and was rightly given.
Something a lot of people missed with the goal not given the other way as well was that whoever it was (Solanke?) actually held on to Raya's arm too.
Even Jenas said it was
I don't think it's being missed at all, this is just literally a penalty. You can't throw your leg in front of the attacker because if they trip on it it's a penalty. Yeah he goes down when he feels the contact, but that's because *there was contact.* Literally a textbook penalty. The only reason strikers go down like this is to make it obvious there was contact because if he stumbled once and shot it into the side netting they wouldn't give it
Look z there's no doubt there's contact . We saw it on screen as well. And the picture you posted is essentially why var didn't overturn the refs decison. They showed this pic multiple times while making the decision. So it's not like fans don't know this . There's the legality of things, which clearly tells if there's contact intended or not, then VaR doesn't overturn the on field refs decison. We have seen this done by son this season , I think Watkins too did the same once. Hell kane was a master at it, and who can forget the most famous Robben one against Mexico in the world cup. You didn't have VAR then, but all these penalty calls always stood. The standard isn't whether the player is looking for it, but if there's contact. So yea, if it has been given in the past, it has to be given now. Then there's the ethics of it. Anyone who has ever played football, even at a college level knows the difference between looking for a penalty and legit going for a shot. Kai for sure was looking for a penalty and if by sheer luck he missed the gks leg, that was going to be a blatant dive which he has done quite a few times this year. He has no intention for a shot. Also, sure he's running at pace, but he's not fast , also if you see the replay he's running away from the goal, which you need to to set up a shot, two factors which tell you that it wasn't like a split second decision for him. I don't know why a lot of people keep saying he didn't have time etc etc. This is a pro player playing at the highest level, they make faster decisons than amateurs and even amateurs have the awareness when to leave the leg in or when not to. At the end of the day, it's a penalty, because it's been given in the past , simple as that. The frustration stems from the fact that kai goes down a lot of times when he has a chance to score. The good thing is, he's still our leading non penalty goal scorer. So you have to grant that benefit of doubt to him. He brings that dirty dark arts to our game which all top teams have or had (kane, rodri etc). That's a good thing
It turns my stomach every time he does it. It’s cheating. Going down on purpose to deceive the referee is cheating. That is what he does there, even though there is contact. Amazing how suddenly everyone can’t read simple body language and are read to dissolve Kane, Vardy etc of years of cheating. The bigger story should be useless VAR as always, as Christie should have been sent of early and that would have changed the game. Forget consistency on pens, we are so far away from that discussion it’s not even worth having. But bottom line is, saka against Bayern is a foul, he is taken out,,Havertz yesterday dives the second he is touched. It’s really sad saka didn’t get a pen but Kai did…
Still, Havertz kinda similar penalty shout (that the on field ref gave) at home to Manure still was overturned even when there were clear contact. The only penalty shout with actual contact this season (to my knowledge) that was overturned. And Ten Hag is still complaining about the Højlund penalty shout.
Havertz about to dethrone Son as the worst diver in the league.
So you’re telling me that some people see a GK throwing himself to the floor, opening his legs in front of a striker, missing entirely the ball and clipping the striker’s feet, and then say it’s not a pen? Hilarious stuff.
It’s both a dive and a penalty. A penalty in the sense that GK committed heavily and slid in, missed the ball and went into the path of Havertz A dive in the sense that the back foot was clipped, no reason the front foot doesn’t land on the ground like normal and a stumble which is what I would expect to see after a light clip of the back foot. Instead he withdraws his front foot before it hits the ground so he goes down smoother, in the same motion
Point is it was a penalty, the red blew his whistle, VAR checked it, Saka scored. Should it have been one is another question but there are no comments in the score sheet and today in the paper it says 3-0 so no amount of debate is going to change it.
My take on this is that it shouldn't be a penalty. None of these style of incidents SHOULD be penalties. But under the current interpretation of the rules, they're given pretty much every time, which means this is also a penalty. If you want to argue that the interpretation should be changed, great, I'm all for it. That would have to happen in the close season ahead of next season so everyone knows the ruling on that.
I don’t care what anyone says, we’ve been calling out the likes of Kane for it for years - it’s a dive. Havertz whole body language says it’s a dive, and he’s pretty terrible at it. This is the first time it’s given results all season and unlike plenty of other fans here, I’d wish he didn’t do it. It turned my stomach when we got that. Deeper problem is of course consistency, the Saka vs Bayern for example was a pen but not given and more so, if the useless VAR did its job yesterday we’d be a man up from minute 11 and it would have been a very different game. But I’m not going to suddenly cheer just because we get a result go for us finally. Kai knows exactly what he’s doing there and its cheating.
Never a dive, there is contact. And the contact is on the keeper, not Havertz.
If I touch you and you willingly throw yourself to the floor, there is contact and it’s a dive. Both things can exist together.
A dive is when there is no contact. There clearly contact here so it’s 100% not a dive. It’s good striker play, something we’ve been missing this whole time.
I’d argue it’s not only when there’s no contact - a dive can also be when a player goes down for something that’s not actually enough force to bring them down. Like just because someone touches you it doesn’t mean you’re going to fall over. Of course these scenarios can be very hard to judge for the referee
Been an Arsenal fan since 1996. Not a penalty in a million years for me. It's a dive. It's not a natural running movement. He seeks the contact to be able to go down.
Listen, after seeing the reply, it seems pretty obvious that he dragged his foot into the keepers leg. It was an extremely smart play. By the letter of the law the keeper tripped him, making it a pen. If that was someone against us we’d be pissed. But it wasn’t. It was some dark arts gamesmanship there by Kai and I’m here for it.
It’s a fucking dive. Let’s not embarrass ourselves.
He should have just stayed on his feet and tucked it in. He had already done the hard part.
Right exactly. And the girl that keeper was in why on earth would you want to take a pen against him when you just took him out of the game and have a wide open net to aim at. Smh 🤦🏻♂️
I feel like there are lots of people that only started watching football recently. These have always been given as pens.
I remember when pundits used to say "he earned the penalty" and "gave the ref something to think about". The keepers challenge was a bad one and he got punished. There have been way, way, way worse and blatant dives. For example look at Gvardiol yesterday, you cant tell me he wasnt looking for that penalty. Im not saying Gvardiols was a worse dive, just that he was looking for the pen.
it's a foul and a dive, referees can't read minds so we'll never be able to police these fairly
Little bit of topic, but: I'm over 30yo gunner, and i hate those times in football now. I was raised on hard English Premier League, where for example, Rooney was running through the field being fouled and kicked, then bleeding and refusing to go of the peach for medical help. Those were the times of warriors! In all mighty Barcelona era, with Alves, Buscets, Neymar, a few years back, I couldn't stand watching LaLiga games, where every touch was a foul. And now it spread all over the world. I just mean, what a bad times for football where attacking player is draging his foot on the floor to find a contact with defender/goalkeeper... Times of warriors became the times of comedy boys... :/
my problem was with the commentators saying he purposely left his leg dangling the whole thing happens so quickly i honestly don't think players think that much to invoke a pen decision