Fouls outside AND inside the box. So what ?

In fairness this IS the U.S. F.A, but it provides some clarification. The whole entry is lengthy, but I've extracted the final part:

Subject: When Fouls Continue!
Date: April 30, 2007

Prompted by several recent situations in professional league play, a discussion has developed regarding the proper action to take when a foul continues over a distance on the field. Many fouls occur with the participants in motion, both the player committing the foul and the opponent being fouled, and it is not unusual for the offense to end far away from where the initial contact occurred.

Usually, the only problem this creates for the referee is the need to decide the proper location for the restart. Occasionally, however, an additional issue is created when the distance covered results in an entirely different area of the field becoming involved. A foul which starts outside the penalty area, for example, might continue into and finally end inside the offending player’s penalty area. Or a foul might start inside the field but, due to momentum, end off the field. In these cases, the decision about where the foul occurred also affects what the correct restart must be.

In general, the referee should determine the location of the foul based on what gives the greater benefit to the player who was fouled. FIFA has specifically endorsed this principle in one of its “Questions and Answers on the Laws of the Game,“ which states that a penalty kick is the correct restart if a player begins holding an opponent outside the player’s penalty area and continues this action inside his penalty area.

http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/?p=2987

Watching the replays I tried to discern whether or not Demichelis followed through on the initial tackle and honestly wasn't able to reach a definite conclusion. As I said, given the circumstances, I think the ref ought to be cut some slack on this even if he did get it wrong.

But it is weird how when a person is repeatedly fouled over a 3 second period outside the box it is in the place of the first freekick not the last.

-------------------------

Its not a case of being repeatedly fouled, its just the one foul. I'm not talking specifically about last nights incident as I am not sure if it did continue into the box, but If the foul had not continued into the box then the attacker may have had a chance to stay on his feet and continue.

But that would imply that you were still running while having your shirt pulled.

Messi was falling down due to contact from outside the box. He in no way had any control over the ball or situation for an advantage to be played.

------------------------

My comment wasn't specifically about messi last night, just in general. I'm not sure if the foul last night continued into the box. But if it did continue into the box then it is a pen.

I don't mean just the player carrying on into the box before going down (that would be a FK) but the actual foul has to continue. I made the pint about shirt pulling because it explains the point better because that type of foul can continue longer.

I agree with your shirt pulling example I dont think they are comparable though.

I agree with your shirt pulling example I dont think they are comparable though.
------------

Why not?

Demichelis' trailing leg actually caught Messi in the box, though the first contact was outside. And the contact that brough Messi down was prolonged enough to continue in the box. Messi was caught outside but swept off his feet INSIDE under prolonged, lingering contact. I'd give a pen all day long.

comment by 5x (U5488)
posted 9 minutes ago
I agree with your shirt pulling example I dont think they are comparable though.
------------

Why not?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Because no Barcelona player had Control of the ball after the initial Contact for an Advantage to be played. Therefore any following contact is irrelevant.

"Because no Barcelona player had Control of the ball after the initial Contact for an Advantage to be played. Therefore any following contact is irrelevant."
======================================

Well clearly Demichelis doesn't agree with you as he is still fouling him inside the box

Again, this is not a pop at City who I thought were very dangerous 11 vs 11, it's just a very useful example with regard to the way the rules are interpreted.

I agree with your shirt pulling example I dont think they are comparable though.
------------

Why not?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Because no Barcelona player had Control of the ball after the initial Contact for an Advantage to be played. Therefore any following contact is irrelevant.
--------------------------

Ok, talking about last night, the ball was right in front of Messi, its not like he had kicked it out of play or had no chance of getting it so he did have control of it, surely.

Imo even though slight contact was made outside the box, the contact that actually made messi go down was inside the box. When Demi takes his legs away that was Imo the major foul which caused messi to go down.