and followed by an exaggerated roll around on the floor like he'd just been shot
doesn't do himself any favours that lad.
The roll was after (and because of) the yellow card. Why can't you see that?
Penalty kicks
- Thread starter Billy The Spur
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
The roll was after (and because of) the yellow card. Why can't you see that?
Just in case anyone's forgotten, this is one of Bale's earlier bookings for simulation this season:
Both against Sunderland, both in the box and both clear goalscoring opportunities.
You must log in or register to see images
Both against Sunderland, both in the box and both clear goalscoring opportunities.
I can see that. I just think it all adds to his theatrical nature, which doesn't do him, or spurs any favours.
Maybe if you sell him, you might get a few penalties next season
Convenient of you to chop off the 2 seconds that follow the slight contact, showing Bale do his customary legs flailing behind him and falling over completely unnaturally
That was, like the one yesterday, a foul and a dive/exaggerated fall).
It was pretty much the only way he could let out his frustrations without getting a second booking for dissent.
Convenient of you to chop off the 2 seconds that follow the slight contact, showing Bale do his customary legs flailing behind him and falling over completely unnaturally
That was, like the one yesterday, a foul and a dive/exaggerated fall).
I didn't make the GIF. Specsavers didn't make your glasses.
You're right Luke there is no discenable bias. Man U. Chelsea and Arsenal get the good luck, Spurs get the bad luck.
We need to practice our Luck more if we want to move forward.
There is a precidence for the small guys: The Dinosaurs were really unlucky and the little rodents struck gold. We live in hope.
Don't talk to me about luck. Utd hit the post and bar 24 times - more than any other team. If those had gone in, we'd have scored 110 goals!
There are lots of conspiracy theories for the demise of the dinosaurs. I blame the caterpillars eating all the plants.That or the reversal of the magnetic poles. Or cataracts.
The rather pointless table that shows where everyone would stand if hitting the woodwork counted as a goal:
You must log in or register to see images
Saw it, sort of wanted to post it and couldn't see anywhere appropriate!
The rather pointless table that shows where everyone would stand if hitting the woodwork counted as a goal:
You must log in or register to see images
Saw it, sort of wanted to post it and couldn't see anywhere appropriate!
Pointless?
Arsenal and Chelsea miss out on top 4 and Newcastle get relegated!!
Pointless table
All it really shows is which clubs need to concentrate more on goalscoring in training... Hitting the post isn't bad luck, it's lack of ability.
All it really shows is which clubs need to concentrate more on goalscoring in training... Hitting the post isn't bad luck, it's lack of ability.
Convenient of you to chop off the 2 seconds that follow the slight contact, showing Bale do his customary legs flailing behind him and falling over completely unnaturally
That was, like the one yesterday, a foul and a dive/exaggerated fall).
Two points: you can see in the video that Bale picks his feet up very straight but that when he is clipped his right foot is at quite an angle so he is almost bound to lose balance and fall over; the laws are very clear the offence of simulation is pretending to be fouled or injured: there is no requirement on how you have to fall over after the foul. Bale couldn't have pretended to be fouled because he WAS fouled. Amazing contrast with Luiz at Old Trafford who was fouled and then clearly pretended to be injured but no action was taken at all.
AVB is 100% correct when he said Bale is being `chased` by referees, it is nothing short of victimisation and way beyond a joke. Also, if Bale was playing Liverpool or Man Utd do you think he would be being treated in this way?.... not a chance!
It is also the inconsistency which is so frustrating, I see other teams being given soft penalties for dives and dodgy handballs etc and wonder why Spurs do not even get any nailed on spot kicks. Take Suarez for example, he dives and over reacts every single time he is tackled in or out of the box (amongst a whole plethora of other dirty antics), and has been awarded penalties and free kicks, he gets away without bookings ..... maybe its because he plays for Liverpool (everybody knows referees have a soft spot for them).
Bale must be seriously fed up.
It is also the inconsistency which is so frustrating, I see other teams being given soft penalties for dives and dodgy handballs etc and wonder why Spurs do not even get any nailed on spot kicks. Take Suarez for example, he dives and over reacts every single time he is tackled in or out of the box (amongst a whole plethora of other dirty antics), and has been awarded penalties and free kicks, he gets away without bookings ..... maybe its because he plays for Liverpool (everybody knows referees have a soft spot for them).
Bale must be seriously fed up.
Convenient of you to chop off the 2 seconds that follow the slight contact, showing Bale do his customary legs flailing behind him and falling over completely unnaturally
That was, like the one yesterday, a foul and a dive/exaggerated fall).
what the hell has it got to do with his leg's,the guy has got hold of him round the waist,that is a foul in itself,without the trip!
S
Spur of the Moment
Guest
And the silence from Referee Marriner in rescinding yesterday's travesty is deafening!!
If he had come out an admitted the error as soon as he had seen the video it would almost be possible to excuse the decision. The failure to do so just exacerbates the situation and leads officials open to allegation of witch hunts or bias etc.
If he had come out an admitted the error as soon as he had seen the video it would almost be possible to excuse the decision. The failure to do so just exacerbates the situation and leads officials open to allegation of witch hunts or bias etc.
What's interesting about the topic, taking a step back, is that no explanation really seems very satisfactory.
Bad luck?
Could be--but why does the bad luck happen to the same team that also has had the most famous goal scored and not counted, and the most famous not counted and scored, in PL history? Especially when the latter took place against the team that had 11 penalties given and conceded one.
We acknowledge cases of bias: Fergie time being the classic example. Few reasonable people deny Fergie was able to manipulate some refs to a certain degree using the tools he had at his disposal. So bias does exist. When there seems to be remarkable and consistent bias for or against one or more teams, claming it's just luck doesn't really make so much sense.
Bribery/corruption: Once again, could be. The problem here is that nobody including me likes to say or hear things like, it's all a fix. I tend to reply, well, if that's what you think, why keep watching? Also, the decision yesterday only benefitted Arsenal, not Chelsea. While Arsenal has had a couple of gifts from the refs lately, their yearly penalties given received is 6/6. So you can' t say that they, unlike Chelsea, are the typical beneficiaries of favoritism.
Too well behaved? Could be, again. The problem here is that the Bale penalty yesterday was just about as blatant as any I've seen. Even teams that don't worry refs tend to get those.
After effects of Bale diving at other times? Well, maybe. But if so, why do teams of players who have dived 20 times more than Bale, like Ronaldo and Suarez, not suffer?
So I remain truly mystified.
Bad luck?
Could be--but why does the bad luck happen to the same team that also has had the most famous goal scored and not counted, and the most famous not counted and scored, in PL history? Especially when the latter took place against the team that had 11 penalties given and conceded one.
We acknowledge cases of bias: Fergie time being the classic example. Few reasonable people deny Fergie was able to manipulate some refs to a certain degree using the tools he had at his disposal. So bias does exist. When there seems to be remarkable and consistent bias for or against one or more teams, claming it's just luck doesn't really make so much sense.
Bribery/corruption: Once again, could be. The problem here is that nobody including me likes to say or hear things like, it's all a fix. I tend to reply, well, if that's what you think, why keep watching? Also, the decision yesterday only benefitted Arsenal, not Chelsea. While Arsenal has had a couple of gifts from the refs lately, their yearly penalties given received is 6/6. So you can' t say that they, unlike Chelsea, are the typical beneficiaries of favoritism.
Too well behaved? Could be, again. The problem here is that the Bale penalty yesterday was just about as blatant as any I've seen. Even teams that don't worry refs tend to get those.
After effects of Bale diving at other times? Well, maybe. But if so, why do teams of players who have dived 20 times more than Bale, like Ronaldo and Suarez, not suffer?
So I remain truly mystified.
There is of course a more reasonable explanation for why United get more penalties than the rest of us...
The majority of teams, when playing against them play a negative brand of backs-against-the-walls anti-football, in the hope of coming away with a point. As a result a greater portion of the match action occurs in the half and box which United are attacking. It's clear to see why this results in more penalties being awarded to them - both because there is a higher chance of fouls occurring in the penalty area, and there's a subconscious attempt on the part of the referee to make the scoreline reflect the balance of play, so penalties are awarded to them more easily.
Generally teams do not play this way against us yet, though we did see a few examples of it this season.
The majority of teams, when playing against them play a negative brand of backs-against-the-walls anti-football, in the hope of coming away with a point. As a result a greater portion of the match action occurs in the half and box which United are attacking. It's clear to see why this results in more penalties being awarded to them - both because there is a higher chance of fouls occurring in the penalty area, and there's a subconscious attempt on the part of the referee to make the scoreline reflect the balance of play, so penalties are awarded to them more easily.
Generally teams do not play this way against us yet, though we did see a few examples of it this season.
the league wants fans to respect refs,how can they when they see decision's like Marriner's,the refs should have after game press conference's like managers so they can explain certain decisions,until that happen's i can't see refs getting respect!
Marriner, Clattenburg, Wiley, Foy, Atkinson etc have all shafted Spurs at some stage.
Marriner incidentally, was the ref who awarded Lampard`s goal that didnt cross the line at SB in 2011 (and subsequently the offside winner).
Marriner incidentally, was the ref who awarded Lampard`s goal that didnt cross the line at SB in 2011 (and subsequently the offside winner).