Probably a correct decision but I loathe all this "entitled to go down" crap. Blimey, so the inevitable pundit conversation about whether or not a suspected fouling player made contact with the ball first/ at all is irrelevant? It all hinges on whether the ref thinks a tackle is "careless, reckless or using excessive force". Conversely, you can kick an opponent as long as it's carefully considered (i.e. not careless), not directly reckless and a bit soft i.e. doesn't use excessive force?
You're old enough to remember Franny Lee? He dived regularly to win penalties and free-kicks, he wasn't alone back then, the finger was pointed at plenty of others he was the only one brazen enough to admit it, diving isn't a modern phenomenon. Nothing that happens in the modern game surprises me, the pressure to succeed at any cost is so great that 'stretching the law' has become the accepted norm, that's why so many have fallen out of love with it. This season, instead of attending home games I've started going to Winterton, I'm really enjoying it, the skill level is different but the endeavour and lack of artifice, friendly stewarding and banter is a real breath of fresh air. The professional game as we knew it has gone, and as the financial rewards increase it's only going to get worse. If you think the game will ever go back to it's Corinthian core, methinks you're in for a long wait OT.
Nothing I said should suggests either a rose tinted view of how things were or any expectation of the clocks being turned back. I agree with your points but even allowing for them I would still say that the growing acceptance of widespread cheating is escalating to a point where the whole integrity of the game is at stake. As you say, it's some relief that the lower leagues offer an alternative.
The modern game at it's highest level has zero integrity, when players are being chastised by their managers/coaches for being ''too honest'' tells you everything you need to know. It's broken and there seems to be little will to fix it!
Kevin Mirallas dive on Saturday was a "proper" dive. Still think Benteke was a penalty. http://globalexpressnews.com/howard-webb-hails-assistant-for-brave-decision-over-benteke-penalty/
If the referee/linesman deemed he (Benteke) was not in control of or had lost the ball then he would not be in a in an obvious goal scoring situation. Had he been, the referee would have to send Delaney off.
Well I certainly am, and I surmise TigerRoo, whose post you responded to, is on the same trail. A penalty was given, admittedly, but the question being debated is was it a clear-cut penalty offence, or was it a dive. By not sending Delaney off, the officials came to the conclusion that it was not a clear cut goal scoring opportunity that was denied. Nor was it any of the other offences that the rules state merit a red card. Delaney did not slide tackle from behind, he did not swing his trailing leg as follow up etc etc. Hence the situation become much much grayer. That conclusion by the officials then devolves into the subtle realm of intent and action/reaction. Have you watched the frame by frame replay of the incident ? Here it is. Keep clicking pause. At 0:08 Benteke appears to this blind man already launching himself forward, an instant before contact is made, if indeed it actually was. In watching the incident in slow motion it is incredibly difficult to determine at what point in the sequence Delaney's knee "brushed ever so lightly" Benteke's foot or when Benteke started his forward tumble. How the hell could the linesman or ref determine either. Delaney clearly ( on camera) attempted to move his offending leg & foot away from the in-motion Benteke, before contact (if any). Benteke was in the air, Delaney's knee seems to be sliding on the ground at the time of contact between the two. How the hell the linesman called that I do not know. Benteke was very cute. I always thought "when in doubt" referees were instructed to not call an offense. I sufficient doubt exists in this case. Bad call imo. No red card is an indicator of doubt by the officials. The subtlety of the "collision" should have confirmed the doubt. No penalty. Very bad call.
A tackle ? FFS. Leg removed from action. No tackle from behind. Delaney clearly started his slide from the side. An engineered dive.
You can see that without any shadow of doubt on the footage can you ? Or have you seen better camera angles than I have, or more importantly ,than the officials saw at the time ? If there's a mild shoulder charge in the box & the attacking player goes down, should the officials give a penalty ?
