[Albion] Why didn't we get the penalty?

[Seagull58]

He knows it’s getting away from him………..even if he was touched it did not contribute to the decision. A touch Does Not means it has to be a penalty

I can't agree, having watched it several times. Krull caught his foot with his studs. He stumbled, couldn't regain balance and went down. The only "mitigating factor" for the atrocious ref is that he went down a bit theatrically.

 

[jackcgull]

he would have scored... although if he had hit it first time, he also would (could) have scored. awful decision.

 

[zefarelly]

I can't believe no one else has mentioned the fact NM felt a feather n the back of his heel from the defender, before he got anywhere near the keeper.

A: a good striker would have ridden the lot and scored.
B: He went down for the first 'touch' ( his brain didn't react quickly enough)
C: the Krul challenge was a penalty 'these days'
D: too late sunshine, you ****ed yourself by diving before it happened.

 

[Questions]

Is that why after he got clipped he stayed up but stumbled to the ground? yeah, totally going down quick.

Once he realised he’d overrun it.

 

[Questions]

I can't agree, having watched it several times. Krull caught his foot with his studs. He stumbled, couldn't regain balance and went down. The only "mitigating factor" for the atrocious ref is that he went down a bit theatrically.

I can’t decide now

 

[Questions]

I think you've answered your own question when you mention him trying to stay on his feet. Bizarrely his honesty actually costs us the decision. If he goes down immediately I think it gets given.

He knows it’s getting away from him………..even if he was touched it did not contribute to the decision. A touch Does Not means it has to be a penalty

 

[Winker]

We didn't get a penalty because the Premier League doesn't want teams like little old Brighton in the top six. We should know our place!

 

[Swansman]

There was contact.
It was a penalty.
It actually annoys me that this thread has turned into a debate.
It was a penalty.

Yup.

It wouldnt be a debate if it was a fan darling like Cucurella or Dunk being in the exact same situation. But now it is Maupay and his boo boys from last season are trying to find a way he failed rather than was fouled.

"He knew it was going away from him...". "The fall was too theatrical..". "He was basically almost nearly going down already...". "Maupay had aligned moon and Jupiter in a way that this is all his own fault".

Yeah thats all great. The rule book isnt a philosophy book however. It says, give or take a few words, "if someone clips you in the opponents penalty area its a ****ing penalty every day".

 

[Seagull58]

Yup.

It wouldnt be a debate if it was a fan darling like Cucurella or Dunk being in the exact same situation. But now it is Maupay and his boo boys from last season are trying to find a way he failed rather than was fouled.

"He knew it was going away from him...". "The fall was too theatrical..". "He was basically almost nearly going down already...". "Maupay had aligned moon and Jupiter in a way that this is all his own fault".

Yeah thats all great. The rule book isnt a philosophy book however. It says, give or take a few words, "if someone clips you in the opponents penalty area its a ****ing penalty every day".

I didn't say "the fall was too theatrical" (maybe somebody else did). I said he was clipped and it was a clear pen but the only mitigating factor for the awful ref was that "he went down a bit theatrically".

 

[essbee1]

Anyway, for every injustice that we feel, there will be equivalent decisions made the opposite way over the course of the
season. So, no point getting pissed off about it really, even though we are.

 

[Swansman]

Anyway, for every injustice that we feel, there will be equivalent decisions made the opposite way over the course of the
season. So, no point getting pissed off about it really, even though we are.

Unfortunately the existence of such balancing mechanisms when it comes to justice / fairness / luck is based on some 1960s stoned out theories about cosmos and whatnot and may not function like that in reality.

That said, hopefully you are right!

 

[essbee1]

Unfortunately the existence of such balancing mechanisms when it comes to justice / fairness / luck is based on some 1960s stoned out theories about cosmos and whatnot and may not function like that in reality.

That said, hopefully you are right!

Well that's what happened in the past 5 seasons. So, while I feel it was a 100% penalty today, I'm sure we'll get decisions
our way the other way.

 

[Icy Gull]

VAR has been our friend, normally in our penalty area, far more often than it has screwed us over in the last couple of seasons. Although I thought it was a pen, at least it wasn’t a crucial one and on the balance of play we deserved no more than a point. It was a quick decision too.

I bet Leicester fans were far more upset than most Albion fans yesterday at their two non goals in our game against them.

Win some, lose some, we are currently ahead in the winning imo

 

[Stephen Seagull]

Honestly, at first glance it looked like Maupay had dived and I honestly thought he’d get booked when the ref blew the whistle.

It wasn’t until after the replay we saw the “contact” from Krul, there was never enough to overturn the decision from VAR as it wasn’t ‘clear and obvious’ based on this seasons VAR usage

 

[Questions]

Is that why after he got clipped he stayed up but stumbled to the ground? yeah, totally going down quick.

Ok point taken……. He went down in instalments then.

 

[Baldseagull]

He knows it’s getting away from him………..even if he was touched it did not contribute to the decision. A touch Does Not means it has to be a penalty

I used to think that, thought players were conning the ref by going down at the slightest touch, but VAR over the last few seasons has taught me otherwise, penalties have been awarded for any contact at all if the player falls over. I will be happy if this is a consistent change, but I reckon Man City will get awarded one for a very similar contact against us next week, just to rub it in.

 

[Justice]

Why would he dive he would of scored absolute joke of a decision.

 

[portlock seagull]

Honestly, at first glance it looked like Maupay had dived and I honestly thought he’d get booked when the ref blew the whistle.

It wasn’t until after the replay we saw the “contact” from Krul, there was never enough to overturn the decision from VAR as it wasn’t ‘clear and obvious’ based on this seasons VAR usage

Exactly how I saw it too.

 

[amexer]

We all moan about VAR but like many cases this season is another where VAR have backed ref . On looking again dont think it helped that Maupay first touch was very heavy

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Honestly, at first glance it looked like Maupay had dived and I honestly thought he’d get booked when the ref blew the whistle.

It wasn’t until after the replay we saw the “contact” from Krul, there was never enough to overturn the decision from VAR as it wasn’t ‘clear and obvious’ based on this seasons VAR usage

And purely in football terms it is a good development. Some of last season’s VAR penalty decisions were a joke. We have returned to a situation where breathing on an opponent is not considered a foul so we have to accept we won’t get those decisions. I think it has already filtered through to the players and we are no longer seeing games characterized by defenders being scared to make challenges and forwards waiting to be touched rather than trying to score.