Premier League Thread 2015-16

I work with a few Liverpool fans...........and not one said it was pen.

 

Spot on History,the older I get the more I realise how often refs used to use a bit of common,sadly refs seem to bow to what is expected by the stupid pundits all too often.
It is a shame life is too short for refs to play for a few years before they then go over to the dark side,they might understand it better then.
However I was at a Hereford game last week and the ref was heard to shout sorry gentlemen I got that wrong it is the other way,got the biggest cheer of the night.

 

Spot on, I remember being embarrassed seeing Adam Lallana take tumbles in the penalty area like Benteke did on a consistent basis. Thankfully most of the time the refs didn't buy it and noticed his heavy touch and dragged trailing leg
Plus all this bullshit about running at pace and only needing a slight touch to go down. Watch a game of Rugby.

I'm disappointed that referees and pundits are constantly legitimising cheating behind literal interpretations

 

My view on this hasn't changed. Delaney deserved everything he got for diving in so stupidly. There was absolutely no need for him to do, it was awful defending.

Was it actually a penalty though? Tough call for me. More of a penalty in my book than the one which Vardy did get vs Arsenal. Less of a penalty in my book which Aguero didn't get vs Liverpool.

(PS. As for wanting consistency amongst referee's, I've never understood that concept. Surely what people want is correct decisions? I'm not going to be happy at seeing one referee giving an incorrect decision, just because it's the same incorrect decision which another referee gave.)

 

Think you're misunderstanding, if you're noting my point, st_b. Consistency means we know what it takes for a referee to call a penalty. Inconsistency means that everything is out, or up for grabs. The situation we have with referees is that we no longer know with any degree of confidence that the referee has made the correct decision. And at the moment we have referees being judged in the court of pundits. And even they don't know with any consistency what does and what does not constitute a penalty.

Make a mental note of this Benteke penalty incident, and see, between now and the end of the season, how many times a referee suggests a player has dived or been brought down with a similar level of contact. If consistency reigns, they should all be penalties. What's the betting their not?

Of course I want correct decisions. I'm the one banging on about referees requiring help all the time.

 

Make a mental note of this Benteke penalty incident, and see, between now and the end of the season, how many times a referee suggests a player has dived or been brought down with a similar level of contact. If consistency reigns, they should all be penalties. What's the betting their not?

_________________________________________

I give it seven days before we spot the first abnormally.

 

That long? That is being generous.

 

Not saying it is or isn't a penalty (haven't seen it) though will go with 'isn't' purely because it is Liverpool , however you will never get total consistency as long as human beings are involved. There is a flash when the ref sees the incident and his brain quickly reviews what it has seen. And you don't even get consistency when video evidence is reviewed. ...otherwise these arguments would be resolved quickly by Sky or on MOTD. Doesn't happen...live with it.

Fran bangs her lonely drum.

 

And there is my point. The overwhelming view on here is that it shouldn't have been a penalty. So why would people suddenly accept it as being a penalty, if all such incidents are also given as penalties? If you don't think it's a penalty, then you don't think it's a penalty. The last thing I want is for every single piece of contact to constitute a foul, just for the sake of consistency. But maybe I'm in a minority.

I'd much rather referee's to be correct, than consistent. And if it's to be consistency correct (which is the ideal), then all the better.

 

Haven't seen this yet?

15:00 Stoke v Southampton Referee:- Mike Jones: Assistants:- A Garratt & R West: 4th Official:- A Taylor

 

Come on Fran! Match thread!

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-35752099

Leicester fans celebrating goals produce a small earthquake. I bet we did when VVD's goal went in against Sunderland.

 

Are you saying the earth moved for you Fran?

 

Couldn't have, Jose wasn't involved

 

Not unless Jose ripped his shirt off to celebrate.

 

You know me so well.

 

Just replace "Jose" with "Graziano" and I'm the same

 

Love to see Pelle waving his shirt...not because I fancy him, but I do fancy him scoring a goal again. I feel for him and us.

 

I'd take any kind of celebration after he scores a goal...

 

I take your point. But I'm not influenced by majorities or views on here. If I happen to agree with them then so be it. I'm concerned also that the referee makes the right decision too.

The point I'm making is that suddenly we no longer know what officially constitutes a penalty, simply because, on any other given weekend, that level of contact, especially where the defender has tried not to tackle, would be seen as a dive by the striker. So you see a lack of consistency in refereeing decisions on the same point. So yes, I want them to make the right decision, And yes, I want them to consistently make the right decision. This is the kind of consistency I'm asking for. Not possible? Get referees help, because it has become too important to get a major decision wrong. Plus I want to know what clearly constitutes a penalty, so that I can base my view on a certain degree of certainty.

Away from simple penalty decisions, look at one of Chelsea's goals against Saints recently. Clear foul against one of our players in the build-up. Plus a kick-out by the Chelsea player. Not only did the ref mistakenly allow the play to carry on, he compounded it by not censuring the Chelsea player and then eventually allowed the goal. Look at the consequences of a simple error.

Of course I don't want consistency in errors. But shouldn't that be readily understood?