I'll leave that to you. Ref's don't always take the assistants advice. It's the Ref that makes the decision.
Yes but in this instance the ref is unsighted so will always take the linesman at his word. Only if he sees at well will he overrule.
I genuinely don't understand what all the fuss is about. I was in the gym yesterday listening when Stan "I'm outraged about all the tiny little things in football but it was alright for me to go on strike in Spain and beat up women" Collymore massively lost his rag about it calling it a disgrace. When I saw it I was stunned, it's is 100% a penalty. Delaney hits his foot enough to make him lose his balance and, if he accentuated it, that's only because when people try and stay on their feet and then cock-up the chance when unbalanced the ref never gives a pen. So it's their fault, they've caused this situation. How many times have we heard "he shouldve gone down then" or "he was too honest"? And as for those saying "he'd already overrun it and lost the ball" when it happened, that's got absolutely nothing to do with it. A player doesnt have to have control of the ball for him to be fouled. It was a penalty, simple as, there's not even a debate. You summed it up a lot quicker than I did.
As long as it's fair, I'm all for video decisions for penalties. There has to be some sort of amount of appeals that can be challenged though, say 4 per game, if it's a correct appeal you keep your 4 challenges, if it's a wrong appeal, you lose one & then dives would be given a yellow card as well! Also there are the odd ones that are very difficult to tell, so they would be no penalty & no loss of appeal!
Share your view completely. Better get the message out to Elmo then as he has been inclined to trip over a blade of grass in recent months!
The ref normally indeed would rule based on his assistants advice, but if he chooses to do, he can overrule the assistant
Not sure which tackle you're referring too? Harry normally does take out multiple players - generally cleanly, after winning the ball.
It's a penalty - but I also think the contact wasn't enough to prevent Benteke then planting his left foot when he had to. Instead he withdrew it and threw himself to the ground. Dives after zero contact are easy to condemn - but when there is contact and the player then embellishes it, it's a grey area. I don't like the idea of a player being "entitled to go down" - but then if he'd been honest, stayed on his feet and just staggered slightly, Palace would almost certainly have been taking a goal kick 10 seconds later.
DIVE. Linesman Scott Ledger needs to give his head a bang or better still go for further training. That dive will work against Benteke in the long run.
Bit of a Schrodinger's cat this one... I think it is both a dive and a penalty. He clearly takes a ridiculous tumble for the amount of contact. But the law says contact without any of the ball is a penalty... problem is the law should then also apply to the thousands of shirts pulled in the box every weekend. if that kind of minimal contact warrants a penalty then surely there should be dozens of penalty every weekend
I think that sums it up fairly well, the ref's/linesmen see everything in 'real time' - no every angle, super slo-mo for them; with real time decisions there's always going to be inconsistencies, that's where the problem lies, lots of other teams are gonna get an identical incident and get ****-all. Personally, I think Benteke was lucky, he made the most of the contact and got his penalty, another ref would have waved play on ............ it's football!
Which law specifically says that? There seems little point having corners, as none will ever amount to anything but a foul if it's taken as literally as that.
It's football? I agree it's what football has become but it wasn't always like this. I think this increasing acceptance and justification of an entitlement to go down makes a mockery of the game. It's understandable from authorities, refs, players, journalists and pundits, they are after all in the pockets of the money men, I am surprised how easily it's being sold to the some fans though. It can only further degrade the game .
Offences that result in a penalty... Direct free kick A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force: kicks or attempts to kick an opponent trips or attempts to trip an opponent jumps at an opponent charges an opponent strikes or attempts to strike an opponent pushes an opponent tackles an opponent A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following three offences: holds an opponent spits at an opponent handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area) A direct free kick is taken from the place where the offence occurred (see Law 13 - Position of free kick). Penalty kick A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play. http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...fouls-and-misconduct.aspx#IjqACqQA1w0qDII4.99
Precisely. As you've shown, the laws are easy enough to google, yet people still seem stuck on the daft comments from pundits, like "last man" "there was contact" etc.
