I don't want other fans getting the wrong impression and thinking we are a team of cheats, because we are not! The big decisions: 1) Hammond - slight contact, GK moves his legs. Hammond doesn't argue at getting booked. CORRECT DECISION 2) Fonte - contact, but about a yard outside the area. How lucky we're we! When watching the game I thought it was very close, but the linesman flagged for a FK. Ref blew for a pen and overruled it! Well done! WRONG DECISION 3) Lambert - too much contact. Basically assault/rugby/dump tackle! WRONG DECISION 4) Lambert - minimal contact, but enough to cause him to lose balance 50/50 DECISION Your thoughts on the penalties? COYR!
The calls I would have made (had I been in a video review booth with replays, god knows what I'd have seen on the pitch) 1) Lambert (shirt being ripped off him in the box) - shirt tugging, especially like that, is against the rules. Penalty. 2) Hammond - definite dive, going down before contact. No penalty. 3) Fonte - would have been a soft free kick but not one you could really protest. However it was clearly outside the box, absurd decision. No penalty. 4) Lambert - bundled over without a doubt. Penalty. 5) Lambert - hardly looked like contact at all, very soft. No penalty.
-Dan re: Lambert (shirt being ripped off him in the box) - shirt tugging, especially like that, is against the rules. Penalty. Definitely..! The others: Fonte - free kick Hammond - No penalty Lambert trip - No penalty Lambert bundled - Penalty Rickie doesn't miss from the spot, so lets call it 3-0 anyway.
Don't forget Guly being decked in the first half when he flicked the ball round the cb and got blocked off! Definite penalty!
In the first half from our view point in the Chapel there looked like some good shouts for pens maybe up to 4. There is no doubt that Lambert was being tugged and battered, but whether it was in the box was hard to see. In the second everything bar the first penalty seemed to happen right in front of us. As far as we could see the first one was just outside the box. Although he did go across the corner of the box in the initial challenge. The ref was right on the spot so it may be he saw something in the initial challenge. If I was a Brighton fan I think I too would be questioning this decision. The Hammond incident was no doubt a dive. He deservedly got booked for it, it was very clumsy. There were 2 further incidents involving Ricky Lambert that on another Day he would have been awarded a pen. The pen he did get was a clumsy challenge, just mis timed. Again I have seen them not given. However there was contact and it was a trip so I guess a penalty. I do not think anyone would argue that the ref was a homer though. He did make some very strange decisions, for me he seemed to be blowing for mostly the second offence. Brighton only got what they deserved they didn't come to make a game of it they came to try and get at least a point and to stop us scoring. After the first goal they then decided to have a go and it nearly paid off at least for 10 minutes. If this is the type of football and techniques we are lacking in this country according to Poyet's recent statement. To me then he shows a lack of understanding of the English mentality and the strength of passion there is in the English game. Saints scored three goals yesterday which in my opinion reflected the difference between the 2 sides in the second half. The fact that there was no shots at our goal through out the game does not hold out much for Poyets way of playing football. He might argue that the penalties turned the game, he should be reminded though that to score he has to get shots on goal. If he hadn't got one on target for 54 minutes it could be reasonably argued that they would not have done so in the next 36!! Roll on Hull.......
interesting that people thought hammond was a dive - from where I was sat in the Itchen North it looked a clear penalty
Sorry, I only posted the decisions in the second half as I was sat in the Chapel. There were definitely a couple in the first half too! But they were the wrong two penalties!
No it was a dive. But I just don't understand how the referee could give the penalty for the Fonte foul. It just didn't look like a penalty. Admittedly I had a perfect view of the incident as I was right in line with it but he fell outside the box as well!!
Linesman flagged for a FK. And even after him and the ref had a chat the ref still gave a pen! Tbh we did deserve a couple of penalties!
From watching TFLS I'm pretty sure there was contact, maybe Deano was looking for it, but his touch was going out of play anyway so you couldn't give it as he would not have been in control. The rugby tackle on Rickie was probably the worst decision I've ever seen, how can a player not look at the ball once, fully concentrating on the other player, just clothesline someone and get away with it? Madness..! But then again, the foul on Fonte was so far outside the box it was unreal!
Fonte- No Pen Hammond- Not sure didn't have a good angle Lambert- He was ankle tapped, Correct decision. Lambert man handled in first and second half. Both should have been penalties. Loving all the Brighton fans moan about it though. The fact in the matter is for 55mins they didn't do anything to warrant a goal.
From my position in front of the TV it looked like a penalty to me. At first I thought he dived but from a different angle he had his legs taken away. Fonte - No pen Lambert touch - No pen Lambert Assault - Pen Lambert neck pull - Pen
I was watching the screen, they showed replays of the Hammond incident. Very very little contact and he was on his way down before that.
there was definitely a hand ball in the first half. from a cross from the left one of the brighton players hand balled it. was not shown on the tv but definitely was
This isn't meant to be a serious comment but it was almost as though the ref had decided he was going to give a couple of penalties and chose the wrong incidents to award them! Absolutely staggeringly terrible performance. He should referee every Brighton game, they deserve each other.
Anyone notice that Hammond didn't argue when he was booked. He knew what he was doing and couldn't complain about the outcome
Hammond went in to get the penalty but didn't actually dive, there was DEFINITE contact, was right in front of me.
