So who has hacked Bow & Gerrez's accounts? Ok claiming it's not a pen is one thing.. but to claim it's a dive?! Everyone on the planet can see contact was made... contact with his standing foot which puts him off balance. It's a stone wall penalty.. man slides in, clear and hard contact is made with the foot, doesn't touch the ball.. I mean i'm not sure what else you'd want from a tackle for it to be more stone wall?
Ah but that's the thing... Ref's don't give fouls if you don't go down. A foul shouldn't have to make you fall over... but unless a player goes down, a ref won't give a foul. That means when a foul may not have quite enough contact to bring you down, you have to exaggerate that fall. In ideal world, everyone would stay on their feet and you'd only go down if it was impossible to stay up... but if refs aren't going to give you fouls for tackles which are clear fouls but don't force you on the floor, what can you do?
Anyone who thinks it isn't a penalty care to explain what should happen then? So the defender slides in on his knees, wiping out the attacker's standing leg. You just blow for a goal kick then? Not giving that penalty, and announcing it was the correct decision to not give the penalty, would within weeks reduce the game to a farce with no one having any idea how much force you're allowed to apply before it suddently counts as enough to be a foul.
I never said the words "it was a dive" although in essence it was. Claiming it's a stone wall penalty is just ludicrous. They'll be giving penalties for sneezing next!
Or for the penalty let's put it this way. Linesmen can't even get it right whether a person was in front of another player or not for offside. Now you want to say to them it doesn't matter whether contact is made with the player (and not the ball), that's suddenly not good enough now because Liverpool got a penalty, instead you must perform instant kinetic analysis on the biomechanical performance of a top level athlete and diagnose not whether the contact happened but what the consequences of the contact was on the player's running or shooting movements.
Completely agree a player shouldn't have to go down for a foul to be given. But an foul occurring does need to happen. This board as taken a turn for the worse today imo. No wonder people compare is to the Arsenal board with the meltdowns irrelevant of results, constant berating of certain players and the biggest pair of red tinted specs known to man!
Did I just imagine it but did we not give one away just like this at some point this season? I only doubt because I don't remember the details.. I just remember us all saying..."Muppet defender going in like that is asking for it" So.....Muppet defender is asking for ut. Palace did a good impression of us last 30 minutes....muppets
The dive was in response to Bow, the comment I quoted I know we like to exaggerate things on here and so on and we all have a laugh around.. but I honestly am struggling as to how people could claim it wasn't a pen. I mean it's not like there was any doubt it was contact made with the man and none with the ball... Claiming it isn't a pen is ludicrous. They won't be giving fouls for wiping out players while making no contact with the ball next!!
So who (apart from bitters) agrees with you BTW because every single media outlet agrees it was a penalty so saying it's about "this board" is very harsh.
Post a video of your two year old sprinting on grass and getting touched (not like that) or you're lying.
No mate, just find it extremely embarrassing when fellow fans can be so blindly biased. The same people would being go mad if that was given against us.
