A slight move to his right, for sure, but no different to a player being on the half-turn waiting for the ball. Why wouldnt he be looking where an opposition player is? Either way there is no excuse the force of the hit.
Toney's Incident with Michael O'Connor
- Thread starter collingham imps
- Start date
Brendan Bradley
Vital Squad Member
It is, because it's obstruction. Most teams do it at all set pieces, and City have been doing it as long as most.
The first time I remember actually hearing it complained about was after a Barcelona/Real Madrid match. Surprisingly enough it was Ramos complaining about Barcelona players blocking him and Pepe.
If you're going to deliberately obstruct you can expect opponents to react. Toney went over the top and should expect a ban, but it's all cheating one way or another.
nlondonimp
Vital Champions League
law of the game:
IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF AN OPPONENT WITHOUT CONTACT
Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.
A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.
'''''
no doubt toney used excessive force, his foul was much worse. i am not defending him, just saying o'connor was fouling in a more subtle way. nevertheless still a foul according to the laws of the game.
D
Deleted member 10554
Guest
Standing there as a player runs towards you at full pelt is neither a foul nor 'cheating'.
O'Connor is controlling the space but there is acres for Toney to move into, yet Toney goes straight for O'Connor with his elbow extended.
I appreciate some people attempt to find a balanced opinion, but on this occasion it's completely wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
Skip155
Vital Champions League
Yes fair comments. I guess I was thinking more about how the game is played in the real world but yes fair points. Still had choices and still assaulted O’Connor and still no justification... but fair points.
nlondonimp
Vital Champions League
yes, but if you know what you are watching, you understand exactly what o'connor is doing, don't you?
"
Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
"
the rule describes almost exactly what o'connor did. more so, what o'connor did, directly from the kick off was clearly something that is practiced. [possibly a classic cowley legacy tactic]
D
Deleted member 10554
Guest
Then by that rationale Andrade was also obstructing. Should our players just stand out the way of opposition players and let them run around us? There you go Mr Toney, your path is clear.
Very hard to see how football could actually be played if that "law", as written, was implemented 100%.
You appear to be ignoring this line: "Being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent."
And if there is any doubt about Toney's actions...
VIOLENT CONDUCT
Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.
Last edited by a moderator:
collingham imps
Vital Squad Member
Appreciate the rules of the game and O'Connors part in this incident- - but Toney could have avoided him but instead took a decision to run straight into him with his arm raise and lays him out for 5 mins plus - hardly an accident - more like a deliberate act to neutralize a player who had a big influence on the first half of the game. If the ref had seen that they would have been down to 10 men and reduced Toney's impact on the game bearing in mind he was involved in the first goal and scored the second.
nlondonimp
Vital Champions League
not ignoring it at all, o'connor did move into the path. it is o'connor's role in the kick off, i assumed you can see that?
and absolutely, the infringement is almost impossible to implement during open play, but shows up most at dead ball situations, and especially at all lincoln kick offs. where a coach can exactly plan the first 5-10 seconds of play. fouls are occasionally given from corners / dead ball situations for blocking.
will most probably be less important to appleton, and hopefully be gradually phased out of our play - replaced by more emphasis on the lovely pass and move interchanges we put together at times yesterday.
clive ford
Vital Squad Member
It was a violent and dangerous attack on a player. Simple!
I think it's also worth noting that at no point was O'Connor completely blocking the run, or a clear run, from Toney to the ball. Walker was, but Toney could have easily missed O'Connor, which is shown by his step to the left (a motion used when you're throwing your weight behind something) and then off the ground as well.
There is no doubt it was a very dangerous action from Toney. It should be a lengthy ban.
In terms of motives etc it’s impossible to know.
I am sure O’Connor was high on Peterborough’s agenda at half time. What they decided the answer was, in terms of how to deal with him, I am not sure.
If it was run straight at him from the kick off and whack him from the back, that is a huge back handed compliment. With video replays of everything now, that would mean you are in effect risking a 3 match ban for one of your players, in return for the chance to get rid of O’Connor. It doesn’t make sense. You certainly would n’t pick a key striker to take that risk. That would be madness.
I think the idea was probably to provoke O’Connor to get a second yellow. Toney overdid it. I did n’t clearly see the incident but was fairly certain Toney must have whacked him. Toney went to O’Connor while he was lying on the ground. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was probably slightly contrite he had actually hurt O’Connor rather more badly than he had intended.
We can never be sure. But it was a deliberate action and dangerous.
For those berating the referee, I had a grandstand view but wasn’t sure exactly what happened. The ref would probably be in a similar position.
You can’t guess.
At least instead of waving a yellow and letting Toney get away with it, there is hope the EFL will have enough gumption to deal with Toney correctly and give him a retrospective red.
In terms of motives etc it’s impossible to know.
I am sure O’Connor was high on Peterborough’s agenda at half time. What they decided the answer was, in terms of how to deal with him, I am not sure.
If it was run straight at him from the kick off and whack him from the back, that is a huge back handed compliment. With video replays of everything now, that would mean you are in effect risking a 3 match ban for one of your players, in return for the chance to get rid of O’Connor. It doesn’t make sense. You certainly would n’t pick a key striker to take that risk. That would be madness.
I think the idea was probably to provoke O’Connor to get a second yellow. Toney overdid it. I did n’t clearly see the incident but was fairly certain Toney must have whacked him. Toney went to O’Connor while he was lying on the ground. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was probably slightly contrite he had actually hurt O’Connor rather more badly than he had intended.
We can never be sure. But it was a deliberate action and dangerous.
For those berating the referee, I had a grandstand view but wasn’t sure exactly what happened. The ref would probably be in a similar position.
You can’t guess.
At least instead of waving a yellow and letting Toney get away with it, there is hope the EFL will have enough gumption to deal with Toney correctly and give him a retrospective red.
clive ford
Vital Squad Member
“Cheating” in all it’s guises is a major part of football, like it or not. Any team that fails to take advantage where they can, will by definition be at a disadvantage.
It’s equally possible to play attractive football and cheat as it is play unattractive football and cheat.
clive ford
Vital Squad Member
Yes but there's cheating, attempted cheating, and smashing someone on the back of head!
Barney Imp
Vital Champions League
Are we saying, then, that it is O'Connor's fault for attempting to block? That's a bit like saying a car deserves to be written off because it is badly parked (or parked in somebody else's spot!)...
Toney had choices and, imo, chose to leap with the intention of connecting with O'Connor. Intent.
Toney had choices and, imo, chose to leap with the intention of connecting with O'Connor. Intent.
impede
Vital 1st Team Regular
However, I do not think I have seen an indirect free kick given for obstuction in years
sedgleyimp
Vital Champions League
I also noted that Toney ran half the length of the field to have a point and shout at Hesketh when their player got his second yellow. Shows that this incident with O'Connor might be part of his footballing nature
D
Deleted member 10554
Guest
Toney was being a tosspot all second half. Should have been sent off for the O'Connor assault (just got a stern look from the referee), should have been booked for kicking the ball away after their first goal (nothing), should have been booked for confronting Hesketh (again, nothing).
I was referring to nlondonimp who seems to think we will soon be playing exquisite football without the need to run sly blocks, put in the odd dive and time waste etc.
Wasn't meaning to imply we should follow Toney's example but the reality is anything short of assaulting a player, is pretty much fair game, if you can get away with it.
