It was a penalty, if that was at Stamford Bridge, the referee would've gave it, it hit Lampard's hand, he denied us a goal scoring opportunity, also Nice of Moyes to say that's the 2nd week in a row that Chelsea have had help from the referees.
The handball incident
- Thread starter Carrick_16
- Start date
I was not a penalty, it would have been harsh if it was given. and this is covered in the match game thread
Of course it was a penalty - Oh , I've got to tell you that I've just seen a display of porcine aviation outside my window ! Nice to see that Moyes has graduated from the SAF school of football manager !
.
It wasn't.
Lampard did not deliberately seek to gain an advantage by using his hand, ergo it was not a handball incident. Nor could you say his arm was in an unnatural position. Atkinson actually made the right call (for once).
First 0-0 for United in 3 thousand years wasn't it? Great start for the ever positive Moyes
It wasn't.
Lampard did not deliberately seek to gain an advantage by using his hand, ergo it was not a handball incident. Nor could you say his arm was in an unnatural position. Atkinson actually made the right call (for once).
First 0-0 for United in 3 thousand years wasn't it? Great start for the ever positive Moyes
Yes it was a penalty and 4 points out of 2 games ain't that bad.
it was 2009 actually.
Thats the base of your argument. Tobes gives a reasoned response, detailing the rules of the game to further his argument, and your counter is "Yes, it was a penalty"?
Care to elaborate on why it is a penalty when the rules of the game state that it isnt? or are you just going to reply with some rubbish about cock acne and rent boys again?
This is sensational stuff Metth, a definite penalty yet the score remained 0-0. Being the home side one would have thought you would have been more attack minded? Still you think we are **** but you couldn't beat us so by your logic what does that make you?
It wasn't.
Lampard did not deliberately seek to gain an advantage by using his hand, ergo it was not a handball incident. Nor could you say his arm was in an unnatural position. Atkinson actually made the right call (for once).
First 0-0 for United in 3 thousand years wasn't it? Great start for the ever positive Moyes
Can you explain the handball he gave against Oscar not long after then? The one in the middle of the pitch where nobody would kick up a fuss for giving it because it was a long way away from a dangerous area? If Oscar's was seen as gaining an advantage, then Lampard stopping that shot was definitely gaining one as his arm was clearly away from his body. Personally I think that kind of call could go either way, you often see them given (and for less obvious handballs too) and they are sometimes waved away, but if the the ref sees Oscar's as a foul then the only reason he doesn't give that as a penalty for a far more blatant incident is that he bottled it, maybe because of the media frenzy that would probably follow if he did.
Yes I can explain that one perfectly, it was shocking decision that was awarded by the crowd!
Atkinson was not even looking at the incident & heard the crowd roar & reacted, it was the path of least resistance for him, as he'd not seen it & Chelsea could have created an opportunity given where it happened & the fact that they came away with the ball.
mourinho was the negative manager last night if you actually watched the game.Tobes:5254656 said:
It wasn't.
Lampard did not deliberately seek to gain an advantage by using his hand, ergo it was not a handball incident. Nor could you say his arm was in an unnatural position. Atkinson actually made the right call (for once).
First 0-0 for United in 3 thousand years wasn't it? Great start for the ever positive Moyes