This is a common belief but there's no basis for it in the laws. If it were true surely the laws would say so.
deedbu93 has a valid point. Football, by it's very nature, is a sport where there is a likelihood of physical contact. When the inevitable 'coming together' occurs, the referee has got to be certain that ONE player rather than the other, has definitely committed a foul - and the tangled limbs is not as a natural consequence of a 'coming together' - at the pace of the modern game not making it any easier for referees to make a call. As it is, I suspect that too many referees 'guess' ! .... on a similar note - I wouldn't want to be in court if the judge & jury are going to guess that I might be guilty just because the locals decided to call me a witch. We live in a democracy - innocent UNTIL PROVEN guilty.
A post on the united board made me laugh,claiming Evra is Lennon's nemisis,if that's the case,can he play him every week!
Exactly, the only clear cut penalty in that match was the Smalling hand ball (Proven by the video). However, if Webb was not 100% certain that Smalling had handled it he was correct not to give it. The only physical connect between Lloris and Young was Lloris's elbow on the foot of Young and that only happened after Young was already going to ground. As Young was going down anyway, then Lloris didn't particularly impede him. I think there was enough doubt for Webb to have difficulty awarding a penalty. The fact that there is so much discussion over the point proves that there is/was doubt.
The one thing I would point out in contradiction is the issue of recklessness. It is not necessary to have intentionally committed a foul, merely to have made, what is construed, as a reckless challenge for the ball. This is, of course, in reference to the Lloris incident.
Exactly. No doubt I'd probably be annoyed not to get the Young one too but given his well earned reputation and Welbeck having already dived in the match to try and get a penalty there's no real reason for complaint from the United fans, especially when Januzaj followed it up by tumbling into Rose a few minutes later. Anyhow it's not like it was deserved or anything, Lloris didn't impede Young's actual shot/cross which was cleared comfortably, if anything it actually helped United to have an open goal to attack. MOTD were embarrassing as usual.
I think to prove recklessness you need to show that Lloris had zero chance of winning the ball, that was not the case.
I think recklessness is more about safety than chance of winning the ball. Moyes is factually incorrect though as a reckless tackle is a Yellow Card offence.
With both feet a long way off the ground, there are many referees who may well have thought that way...
I think that they may have got that the wrong way round. Evra generally struggles badly with Lennon. Combine that trend with a fairly old defender playing lots of games in a short space of time and it didn't work well for them.
Goalkeepers often save the ball with their feet, unless there is a connection I don't see how it could be called reckless.
I forgot to mention this at the time and I don't remember seeing it on here, so congratulations to Michael Dawson on his 400th career appearance. Great way to mark it.
So when was Lloris supposed to have had two feet off the floor again? please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
I can remember Pat Jennings saving many a goal going down feet first.I cannot for the life of me remember him giving away a penalty......
Goalkeepers in previous eras rarely used to leave their bloody line, though. That should upset Spurcat!
Moyes your faux anger convinces no one. You lost! How many times have we lost at OT with poor decisions from officials. In this case Webb had a very good game IMO so little to complain about for either side.
I've watched the incident many times, and I would maintain that many referees would have construed that challenge as reckless...
