The Oxford defender plants his leg across Puerta without getting the ball and gives him a shove. The reason it looks a bit dramatic is that Puerta’s leg is pinned then he’s pushed. It’s more Judo-esque. I don’t think the referee sees the shove and therefore thinks he’s gone over his leg a bit dramatically. Either way the leg makes contact so if the ref was just focusing on this, he still got it wrong.
Well I deny it. Lots of other people have disagreed with your contention. Have you tried looking up 'deniable' in a dictionary? You might have to put your spade down.
Good lord! Yes, as I've said many times, I agree that it was a foul. He then chose to dive over to try and force the ref's hand and it backfired and now he has a ban. People arguing about the mechanics of it and saying that he had no choice but to dive out forwards like that or risk breaking his neck are clinging to a delusion. It's true that players can't win sometimes, because if he'd stayed entirely natural and either not gone down or just stumbled over more gradually then the ref maybe still wouldn't have seen the foul. I accept that. But he did find a way to lose all round by risking, and getting, a second booking for diving. Once again, it doesn't have to be entirely black or white! We don't have to choose between 'he was totally innocent' and 'it wasn't a foul'. Nuance is allowed, even for football fans.
As it happened I thought penalty. Definite penalty As I've watched it since I see the shirt pull, push and trip. Definitely a penalty. Just watched the Hull City Highlights and I know Burns is not regarded highly by some on here. Or if he still watches the game from the very top of west stand upper, without access to immidiate replay, but his immediate instinctive reaction is "oh he needs to be careful here that looks like a dive" And there was the problem. Puerto in that moment resembled Tom Daley to at least two people. One of whom was impersonating a referee. I console myself with at least one of the above two won't have anything to do with today's match. What could possibly go wrong.
I think you and PLT are misusing the term dive, particularly as PLT agrees it was a foul. He emphasised the foul to make sure the ref didn't miss it but that's a very different thing to a dive. A dive is pretending there is a foul where there isn't one. Exaggerating contact is not the same thing.
I think as has been said it was more the exaggerated way Puerta went down that swayed the refs decision making, but I stand by what I said previously, it was a blatant foul. In these days if players attempt to stay on their feet when fouled in the box nothing is given, so in a way they're encouraged to exaggerate the contact to bring it to the notice of the officials, sadly this time it worked against him.
I'm with PLT on this, yes it was a foul puerta made it look more dramatic which the referee took as a dive. In a similar but different scenario who was it who got sent of for the tackle on Josh windass? Yes he was fouled but then went on to rolling around on the floor as if his leg had been broken, that influenced the referee to send off our player.
This is potentially the most ridiculous discussion ever to have taken place on this board I would be interested to know how Puerta should have fallen, if what he did was a dive.
Maybe But without var Its pretty easy to see why the ref thought he dived Or do we want var in the champy
