Andres Iniesta

[JerseyAddict]

Until when Iniesta has signed contract?

 

[Messi983]

2018

 

[zanela]

I remember antonn arguing with me about who's the better one between him and Messi. Good 'ol times.

I hope he plays longer than anticipated. I'd rather a 70% Iniesta over every other MF on our roster (not called Busi) in any crucial fixture.

 

[instinct]

I hope he plays forever. He's my favorite active player, by far.

 

[JerseyAddict]

I hope he plays forever. He's my favorite active player, by far.

Mine to. I do hope he will play as long as he likes. Not benched or shit like that.

 

[Flavia]

His goal should had stood. Terrible from the ref.

 

[Total-Football]

His goal should had stood. Terrible from the ref.

disagree .. any ref in the world would have given that freekick instantly .. because there was no imminent danger ( 1 v 1 with the keeper )

 

[Flavia]

disagree .. any ref in the world would have given that freekick instantly .. because there was no imminent danger ( 1 v 1 with the keeper )

Refs give advantage to less threatening plays. Just the fact there was a goal, and no one had stopped playing, should had made the goal stand.

 

[Total-Football]

Refs give advantage to less threatening plays. Just the fact there was a goal, and no one had stopped playing, should had made the goal stand.

except that this was not more threatening .. it was a brilliant shot outside the box while the ball was Rolling ..had iniesta missed the shot with the Ref giving the advantage everybody would have been on his ass for not giving a " far more threatening free kick " .. it's open to interpretation but i think any ref would blow the whistle for this immediately.

 

[Total-Football]

Refs give advantage to less threatening plays. Just the fact there was a goal, and no one had stopped playing, should had made the goal stand.

He already blew the whistle half a second before the shot ..

 

[Flavia]

He already blew the whistle half a second before the shot ..

That's the thing, they can wait before calling it. If the shot went wide he could still call the foul afterwards.

 

[Total-Football]

That's the thing, they can wait before calling it. If the shot went wide he could still call the foul afterwards.

haaaaa .. !! now i know where your misconception come from .. because you assumed he would go back had Iniesta missed the shot ! .. No .. this only happens when a player 1- couldn't reach the ball 2- disturbed by an opponent .. Iniesta was alone and reached the ball .. if his shot was poor ( to the sky ) then it's a done action .. the ref will not go back to the foul

 

[Flavia]

haaaaa .. !! now i know where your misconception come from .. because you assumed he would go back had Iniesta missed the shot ! .. No .. this only happens when a player 1- couldn't reach the ball 2- disturbed by an opponent .. Iniesta was alone and reached the ball .. if his shot was poor ( to the sky ) then it's a done action .. the ref will not go back to the fool

There is nothing in the rules that say that. "Allow play to continue when the team against which an offence has been committed will benefit from such an advantage. Penalise the original offence if the anticipated advantage does not develop or continue over the next several seconds". http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_5_the_referee_en_47411.pdf

 

[Total-Football]

There is nothing in the rules that say that. "Allow play to continue when the team against which an offence has been committed will benefit from such an advantage. Penalise the original offence if the anticipated advantage does not develop or continue over the next several seconds". http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_5_the_referee_en_47411.pdf

i said it's a matter of interpretation .. that text you brought , what they mean by advantage is not necessarily a " goal " or a penalty " .. otherwise they would have specified that .. by advantage they mean a better position - promessing attack etc .. the outcome itself of that advantage doesn't matter .. So by the book , if the ref evaluated Iniesta's position as an advantage ( better shooting position than the freekickk ) he can allow the play .. but unless that advantage was nullified IMMEDIATELY by an opponent the ref wont go back to the foul .. in this case the ref has to evaluate : " is iniesta in a better shooting position ? or the freekick is better " .. shooting from a dead ball at the edge of the box is far more promessing than a Rolling ball coming from the side. that's how he took his decision .

i'm a hundred percent sure of what i have said , unless you are convinced then we've reached a bit of an impass , we would need a third party to step in

 

[Flavia]

i said it's a matter of interpretation .. that text you brought , what they mean by advantage is not necessarily a " goal " or a penalty " .. otherwise they would have specified that .. by advantage they mean a better position - promessing attack etc .. the outcome itself of that advantage doesn't matter .. So by the book , if the ref evaluated Iniesta's position as an advantage ( better shooting position than the freekickk ) he can allow the play .. but unless that advantage was nullified IMMEDIATELY by an opponent the ref wont go back to the foul .. in this case the ref has to evaluate : " is iniesta in a better shooting position ? or the freekick is better " .. shooting from a dead ball at the edge of the box is far more promessing than a Rolling ball coming from the side. that's how he took his decision .

i'm a hundred percent sure of what i have said , unless you are convinced then we've reached a bit of an impass , we would need a third party to step in

The ref commentator from my game said the same I am saying here. He didn't understand why the goal didn't stand. Carlos Eugênio Simon, from Fox sports Brazil.