Highlights up on Sky

[Acker79]

2 out of 7 in the box appeal - the rest don't at all. Stonewall pen you should do stand up!

The stonewalledness of a penalty is completely unrelated to how many people claim for it, especially when the ball, and therefore the focus of the opposition players is right in front of the goal.

There is that cliche "play to the whistle", if players do that, as four of those seven were (while one was lying on the floor after the challenge), referees can't then just ignore what they believe are fouls because not enough players saw and claimed for them.


I've only seen the angle on the highlights, I don't know if it was a penalty or not, I'm just pointing out the gaping flaw in your apparent logic.

 

[Captain Sensible]

Chris martin has the most punchable face.

Yeah I thought that. He really thinks a lot of himself doesn't he? Hopefully we can give him maximum shit when Derby play at the Amex.

 

[Captain Sensible]

Greer tried to block the cross, Derby player jumps over him, he even gets the cross in first. No pen for me. Although I can understand from where the ref was, how he gave it.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

It was definitely a penalty.

 

[Hampster Gull]

It was definately not a penalty

 

[lawros left foot]

My view is, had we got one exactly like this, it would have been a nailed on, absolutely certain penalty, in fact, so blatant it should have been two penalties.
As it was against us, it was never a pen in a million years, and the ref MUST be taking a bung to give that.

Thats football, I guess

 

[Hotchilidog]

Not even close to being a penalty, surprised so many on here are vociferously defending it. Greer very harshly done by, he's trying to block the cross which Russell successfully gets off whilst running out of bounds. A homer decision, would not have been given at the other end.

 

[Sheebo]

The stonewalledness of a penalty is completely unrelated to how many people claim for it, especially when the ball, and therefore the focus of the opposition players is right in front of the goal.

There is that cliche "play to the whistle", if players do that, as four of those seven were (while one was lying on the floor after the challenge), referees can't then just ignore what they believe are fouls because not enough players saw and claimed for them.


I've only seen the angle on the highlights, I don't know if it was a penalty or not, I'm just pointing out the gaping flaw in your apparent logic.

Players reaction (especially a large number of players) is a great indication of whether something is a good decision or not. I'm not saying it is the be all and end all of a decision, but it's a great indicator. Also the rules you quote are all well and good but if you start giving any sort of infringement as a pen by the laws of the game, you will be looking at 5 or 6 pens a game (see Dunk at Burnley and Greer yesterday...) As I've told you before, the most important rule of refereeing is COMMON SENSE - they teach you that on the course and the examination board also tell you that.

 

[Acker79]

Players reaction (especially a large number of players) is a great indication of whether something is a good decision or not. I'm not saying it is the be all and end all of a decision, but it's a great indicator. Also the rules you quote are all well and good but if you start giving any sort of infringement as a pen by the laws of the game, you will be looking at 5 or 6 pens a game (see Dunk at Burnley and Greer yesterday...) As I've told you before, the most important rule of refereeing is COMMON SENSE - they teach you that on the course and the examination board also tell you that.

Player reaction, like Greer not chasing after and ranting at the ref denying anything, or showing any signs that he felt there was an injustice at the moment it was given (as far as the highlights show)?

The problem with common sense in football, is that people rarely agree on what is and isn't common sense, largely because of their own biases. A lot of refs would probably say it is common sense to give a foul when the challenging player slides in with one leg up, doesn't get the ball and catches his opponent. Fans, managers and players will probably change their mind depending on whether their player is the challenger or the victim.

Greer slid in with one leg high, and from the behind-the-goal-angle replay shown on Goals on Sunday, it looks to me like he caught the player, so I can understand the ref thinking there was contact. (I won't get into an argument about whether there was or wasn't contact, I'm just saying it looked like there was to me, and so I can understand the ref thinking there was, too, I accept others may think there wasn't contact).

 

[El Presidente]

It was definitely a penalty.

It was definately not a penalty

It was defiantly possibly a penalty.