Champions League 2024-25

[MonteCuler]

Its alternative universe.

Imagine the same slip happens with Vinicius and the referee rejects the goal.

Does that make him racist?

Doesn't happen, Vini goal would have stood

Because it was an incredibly close situation, and referees just went for the solution that will bring them less trouble

 

[Birdy]

Enough of this let's see Madrid vs Bayern, Liverpool, Atletico etc. Let's see two teams that beat each other over 100 times face each other in CL.

This is the match-up we need to see far more often in CL. Not twice in decades. Absolutely laughable that the two biggest clubs in the world faced each other only in 2001-02 and 2010-11 since the CL format was put into place in early 90s. That's twice in 35 years ffs.

One of the best things about this new format is that it removes that bullshit rule about clubs from the same countries not being able to meet until very late in the competition.

I imagine clasicos in CL are gonna happen far more frequently from now on.

Disagree...
Madrid - Barca is the greatest rivalry of all the DOMESTIC rivalries in football heritage

It's not a European rivalry THO!! as are not the Dortmund-Bayern, Inter-Milan, Liverpool-UTD, etc.

Domestic leagues exist for a reason.
That's the space to enjoy these rivalries

European rivalries are the Real - Bayern s, the Liverpool- Real s, the Milan - Liverpool s, the Barcelona - UTD s, etc.
There are the ones to watch and enjoy in CL

 

[Don Juan Laporta Estruch]

Very strange that UEFA would see fit to come out and make a statement to justify the decision given to Madrid. Not seen this before. Is this going to be a new precedent with controversial refereeing decisions in the UCL in the future? I doubt it.

The fact they've gone out of their jurisdiction to masquerade as Madrid's PR tells you everything you need to know.

Reminds me of the phrase "The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

 

[companyofcules]

There is visual proof for me. Slow motions from the right angle show a slight touch.

Doctored slow motions. The law doesn't rule for the assumption the ball touches his second leg but actual action taken by a player.

 

[companyofcules]

I have been looking for a direct proof in UEFA rules but haven't really been able to find them nor the specific rules that regard pk shootouts, so not sure if it's 100℅ in the rules. That's why I said maybe.

But like I said Atletico said it in their statement so doubt it's baseless and also a lot of referees said the same, probably a background behind their belief if they all say the same thing

But don't take it for granted it could be someone from Atletico fabricated this as well although I highly doubt it, Atletico themselves doesn't seem to care so much about the decision despite mostly not being sure if it's correct

No there is no rule for the ball hitting the boot. You can bend logic but again it's not the law it's a subjective interpretation.
The rule is not move the ball, not touch it again. Both point to the kicker not the ball itself and the issue is about rebound and dribbling. They just went over the law in a situation where there is no proof. The proofs came hours later with video manipulation.

 

[companyofcules]

By the way in the end they admitted the robbery but in a way that makes them look professional. "We will review the law"

But what's the issue , if it's a correct decision? The law isn't the issue, the issue is with those that robbed Atletico. The cases are actually very rare, because it's risky to deflect a ball, and the law is correct.
If you move the ball or you intentionally deflect it there is a a hidden benefit, you can fool the goalie, you can drible him, you can pass it to yourself.
But let's not be idiots, there is no proof besides doctored images and the law is not meant for this case, can't make a law that applies itself.

 

[Andresito]

No there is no rule for the ball hitting the boot. You can bend logic but again it's not the law it's a subjective interpretation.
The rule is not move the ball, not touch it again. Both point to the kicker not the ball itself and the issue is about rebound and dribbling. They just went over the law in a situation where there is no proof. The proofs came hours later with video manipulation.

Any proof that it's doctored?

 

[companyofcules]

By the way, the only player that constantly broke the law is CR7 whith his planting of the foot that bounces the ball up.
But despite a clear law breaching to not move the ball there was no action taken only applause for his "innovation". But I guess there is no universal application to the laws of football.

 

[Andresito]

Law 14 – The Penalty Kick

"The kicker must not play the ball again until it has touched another player."

"In Julián Álvarez’s case, as he took his penalty, he accidentally made contact with the ball twice—once with his standing foot and then immediately with his kicking foot before the ball entered the goal. "

This is the law that was applied. Same law that in open play if PK taker hits the post and scores the rebound himself it's awards a freekick to opposing team.

 

[companyofcules]

Any proof that it's doctored?

There are plenty of raw footage to compare with the distorted ones. Only in the doctored ones Alvarez's left boot magically accelerates before there is a reason to do it.
You are here asking when they faked a 20 cm gap for Messi?

 

[companyofcules]

Law 14 – The Penalty Kick

"The kicker must not play the ball again until it has touched another player."

"In Julián Álvarez’s case, as he took his penalty, he accidentally made contact with the ball twice—once with his standing foot and then immediately with his kicking foot before the ball entered the goal. "

This is the law that was applied.

Come on, I am bit bored. What's your profession? Law is not for sure.
1
That it's for rebound in regular time.
The rule you need is at article 10,
"The kick is completed when the ball stops moving, goes out of play or the referee stops play for any offence; the kicker may not play the ball a second time"

Who is making the action does matter. Since the rule is for the kicker you need to have an actual play after the kick as a result of an action. It's not don't get touch by the ball.
It's football not dodgeball. There is no such law even for playing with your hand.

But again the rule that actually can apply is stationary ball before a kick. That's why they doctored the images to make the ball bounce lol.
2. VAR has no express jurisdiction over a shoot-out. But that somehow was ignored.

 

[companyofcules]

Here is a clear example of "play" in a minimal sense. He slips, changes the direction of his boot, he enters the path of the ball and the ball changes course. If you are ultra comfortable with interpretations this might be a play. So I am happy to agree there is a case here.
You have an action
the ball is hit
the ball is affected

In the case of Alvarez there is no action, at best the ball scrapes his boot already planted there, following the same path.

Also the ref doesn't call it, because it's impossible to see, and the VAR who is not in jurisdiction makes the call for him.
Absolute fraud.