| Tuesday`s penalty 13:19 - Nov 28 with 7230 views | firgrovedale51 |
I have just watched the goals on you tube and it clearly shows the tackle started outside the penalty area, pity the linesman didn't see that . |  | | |  |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 13:26 - Nov 28 with 5755 views | Mass_Debater |
And it continued inside the area. | | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 13:50 - Nov 28 with 5700 views | SuddenLad |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 13:26 - Nov 28 by Mass_Debater |
And it continued inside the area. |
The referee didn't even think it was a penalty. If it commenced outside the area, then it shouldn't have been given as a penalty regardless of what the linesman thinks. Inept. |  |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 14:56 - Nov 28 with 5597 views | Mass_Debater |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 13:50 - Nov 28 by SuddenLad |
The referee didn't even think it was a penalty. If it commenced outside the area, then it shouldn't have been given as a penalty regardless of what the linesman thinks. Inept. |
The Laws of the Game clearly state: "If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding him inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick."
Same thing applies for fouls.
Whether it was actually a foul (which it was) is another matter, but the fact the offence started outside the area is irrelevant.
http://footballrefereeing.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/outside-or-inside.html | | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:10 - Nov 28 with 5578 views | SuddenLad |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 14:56 - Nov 28 by Mass_Debater |
The Laws of the Game clearly state: "If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding him inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick."
Same thing applies for fouls.
Whether it was actually a foul (which it was) is another matter, but the fact the offence started outside the area is irrelevant.
http://footballrefereeing.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/outside-or-inside.html |
Except the referee didn't see a foul inside or outside of the box, despite having a better view than the linesman.
Just another example of ineptness by officials and players play-acting to 'con' the officials. I'd love to know what Hendo had to say to the linesman after the penalty was converted. Bet he wasn't complimenting him on a correct decision.
Perhaps Coleman will apply for the Scunny job. We used to see plenty of it. Match made in heaven. | |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:19 - Nov 28 with 5557 views | Mass_Debater |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:10 - Nov 28 by SuddenLad |
Except the referee didn't see a foul inside or outside of the box, despite having a better view than the linesman.
Just another example of ineptness by officials and players play-acting to 'con' the officials. I'd love to know what Hendo had to say to the linesman after the penalty was converted. Bet he wasn't complimenting him on a correct decision.
Perhaps Coleman will apply for the Scunny job. We used to see plenty of it. Match made in heaven. |
How do you know the referee had the better view? He was behind the play being blocked by O'Connell. The linesman was side on to it with no obstructions.
I agree it was odd how he didn't blow straight away, but I still think the right decision was reached in the end.
Of more concern is the way we defended that and most other situations on Tuesday. The first goal showed a very high degree of ineptness from all concerned. | | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:27 - Nov 28 with 5546 views | nordenblue |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 13:26 - Nov 28 by Mass_Debater |
And it continued inside the area. |
And it could have continued into the stands,the initial foul took place outside the box therefore no penalty if that's the case!!We didn't deserve to win no matter how much we blame everyone else we looked short of ideas full stop | | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:30 - Nov 28 with 5537 views | firgrovedale51 |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 14:56 - Nov 28 by Mass_Debater |
The Laws of the Game clearly state: "If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding him inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick."
Same thing applies for fouls.
Whether it was actually a foul (which it was) is another matter, but the fact the offence started outside the area is irrelevant.
http://footballrefereeing.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/outside-or-inside.html |
So you are saying that if a foul is committed outside the penalty area and the players fall or slide in to the penalty area it is a penalty, if that is the case there are a lot free kicks on the edge of the box that should have been penalties. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:33 - Nov 28 with 5522 views | Mass_Debater |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:30 - Nov 28 by firgrovedale51 |
So you are saying that if a foul is committed outside the penalty area and the players fall or slide in to the penalty area it is a penalty, if that is the case there are a lot free kicks on the edge of the box that should have been penalties. |
No, read it again.
If the foul starts outside the area and the foul continues inside, it's a penalty.
If there is a foul outside the area, then the player slides/falls into the area, then there was no offence inside the area and it's not a penalty.
The important word is 'continues'. [Post edited 28 Nov 2013 15:37]
| | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:35 - Nov 28 with 5511 views | Mass_Debater |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:27 - Nov 28 by nordenblue |
And it could have continued into the stands,the initial foul took place outside the box therefore no penalty if that's the case!!We didn't deserve to win no matter how much we blame everyone else we looked short of ideas full stop |
Read my earlier post.
It's a penalty if the foul starts OUTSIDE and continues INSIDE, which looks to be the case with O'Connell IMHO.
If a player was fouled outside, but got free and progressed/slid/fell inside the area, it's not a penalty.
You're right, we didn't deserve to win. End of. [Post edited 28 Nov 2013 15:38]
| | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 17:07 - Nov 28 with 5405 views | topoff |
Cant blame the ref, cant blame the linesman, Naive and amateurish defending, if my sunday team defended that bad they would be shipped out... | | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 17:15 - Nov 28 with 5384 views | SuddenLad |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 15:19 - Nov 28 by Mass_Debater |
How do you know the referee had the better view? He was behind the play being blocked by O'Connell. The linesman was side on to it with no obstructions.
I agree it was odd how he didn't blow straight away, but I still think the right decision was reached in the end.
Of more concern is the way we defended that and most other situations on Tuesday. The first goal showed a very high degree of ineptness from all concerned. |
Actually, the 'right' decision would have been to give the clear foul on Matt Done about 5 seconds before, which was far more blatant than any subsequent 'penalty decision'.
Still don't understand why the referee couldn't see the tackle from his position and if not, why not.
For the record, I agree entirely that Scunthorpe were the better side, that they fully deserved 3 points and that we were poor on the night, particularly in defence. The first goal was a horror to concede. None of that, or the Dale performance excuses the subsequent decisions by the officials.
The 'penalty' and subsequent sending-off, changed the game. As Keith Hill said in his post-match comments, it denied Dale the opportunity to compete further in the game. | |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 17:33 - Nov 28 with 5351 views | Yorkshire_Dale |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 17:07 - Nov 28 by topoff |
Cant blame the ref, cant blame the linesman, Naive and amateurish defending, if my sunday team defended that bad they would be shipped out... |
Have to agree......watching it again on Sky should carry a health warning . | | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 17:48 - Nov 28 with 5324 views | Mass_Debater |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 17:15 - Nov 28 by SuddenLad |
Actually, the 'right' decision would have been to give the clear foul on Matt Done about 5 seconds before, which was far more blatant than any subsequent 'penalty decision'.
Still don't understand why the referee couldn't see the tackle from his position and if not, why not.
For the record, I agree entirely that Scunthorpe were the better side, that they fully deserved 3 points and that we were poor on the night, particularly in defence. The first goal was a horror to concede. None of that, or the Dale performance excuses the subsequent decisions by the officials.
The 'penalty' and subsequent sending-off, changed the game. As Keith Hill said in his post-match comments, it denied Dale the opportunity to compete further in the game. |
Actually, it was Henderson, not Done.
You're right, it was a foul, but the subsequent penalty decision was correct, whoever gave it. It was another situation we defended poorly, to which we can add Eastham's inept attempt to clear before the fourth goal.
Can't agree with Hill's comments at all. He seems to have forgotten Lancashire basically getting himself sent-off and letting down his team when we were already one down. | | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 18:34 - Nov 28 with 5268 views | D_Alien |
As the kick's being taken, one of ours (Bennett I think) has encroached so far into the box he could've beaten the penalty taker to the ball. Just as well he didn't miss, as a retake in those circumstances is criminal. |  |
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 19:49 - Nov 28 with 5176 views | downunder |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 18:34 - Nov 28 by D_Alien |
As the kick's being taken, one of ours (Bennett I think) has encroached so far into the box he could've beaten the penalty taker to the ball. Just as well he didn't miss, as a retake in those circumstances is criminal. |
Just watched the You Tube link, and noticed that myself.
The above arguments are void In my opinion. I have referee qualifications, in my opinion, NO PENALTY. There has to be intent in foul play. The Scunthorpe player is on the blind side of the defender. The defender looks to be kicking the ball away when contact occurs.
I now understand Keith Hills post match comments more. First sending off is a tricky one though. |  | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 19:51 - Nov 28 with 5173 views | SuddenLad |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 19:49 - Nov 28 by downunder |
Just watched the You Tube link, and noticed that myself.
The above arguments are void In my opinion. I have referee qualifications, in my opinion, NO PENALTY. There has to be intent in foul play. The Scunthorpe player is on the blind side of the defender. The defender looks to be kicking the ball away when contact occurs.
I now understand Keith Hills post match comments more. First sending off is a tricky one though. |
Lancashire got what he deserved. Both fouls were worthy of yellow cards. One match ban to be served on Saturday. | |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:00 - Nov 28 with 5161 views | 442Dale |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 19:49 - Nov 28 by downunder |
Just watched the You Tube link, and noticed that myself.
The above arguments are void In my opinion. I have referee qualifications, in my opinion, NO PENALTY. There has to be intent in foul play. The Scunthorpe player is on the blind side of the defender. The defender looks to be kicking the ball away when contact occurs.
I now understand Keith Hills post match comments more. First sending off is a tricky one though. |
From FA website:
Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
trips or attempts to trip an opponent
jumps at an opponent
charges an opponent
strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
pushes an opponent
tackles an opponent
A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following three offences:
holds an opponent
spits at an opponent
handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
A direct free kick is taken from the place where the offence occurred (see Law 13 - Position of free kick).
Penalty kick
A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play.
------------
No mention of intent. O'Connell's challenge could be deemed "careless" as he tackled the opponent. |  |
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:03 - Nov 28 with 5150 views | SuddenLad |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:00 - Nov 28 by 442Dale |
From FA website:
Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
trips or attempts to trip an opponent
jumps at an opponent
charges an opponent
strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
pushes an opponent
tackles an opponent
A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following three offences:
holds an opponent
spits at an opponent
handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
A direct free kick is taken from the place where the offence occurred (see Law 13 - Position of free kick).
Penalty kick
A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play.
------------
No mention of intent. O'Connell's challenge could be deemed "careless" as he tackled the opponent. |
Except it wasn't 'in the opinion of the referee'. He didn't think it was a foul. | |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:08 - Nov 28 with 5138 views | 442Dale |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:03 - Nov 28 by SuddenLad |
Except it wasn't 'in the opinion of the referee'. He didn't think it was a foul. |
Agreed, and I doubt this would still be being debated if there wasn't the delay before the linesman made the correct decision. In the second before he noticed the flag, many eyes went straight to the linesman, because it was strange the red missed it. But suppose he might not have had the best view.
Wording of those laws does need looking at, should definitely say "officials". | |
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:34 - Nov 28 with 5098 views | TVOS1907 |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:03 - Nov 28 by SuddenLad |
Except it wasn't 'in the opinion of the referee'. He didn't think it was a foul. |
What about when we got our second penalty v Chesterfield? |  |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:36 - Nov 28 with 5097 views | TVOS1907 |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:08 - Nov 28 by 442Dale |
Agreed, and I doubt this would still be being debated if there wasn't the delay before the linesman made the correct decision. In the second before he noticed the flag, many eyes went straight to the linesman, because it was strange the red missed it. But suppose he might not have had the best view.
Wording of those laws does need looking at, should definitely say "officials". |
Not really because the referee has the final say-so, whether he sees an incident himself or takes the advice of his assistant. That's why linesmen were renamed 'assistant referees'. | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 21:14 - Nov 28 with 5049 views | irisaln |
There are a lot of players do not know the rules. During a penalty
they think they can set off when the whistle blows. If in fact Bennett
had not encroached the two of their attackers that had done so would
have broken the rules the kick should then have been retaken.
I don't think any refs in any league apply this rule. | | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 21:37 - Nov 28 with 5022 views | D_Dale |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 20:00 - Nov 28 by 442Dale |
From FA website:
Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
trips or attempts to trip an opponent
jumps at an opponent
charges an opponent
strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
pushes an opponent
tackles an opponent
A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following three offences:
holds an opponent
spits at an opponent
handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
A direct free kick is taken from the place where the offence occurred (see Law 13 - Position of free kick).
Penalty kick
A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play.
------------
No mention of intent. O'Connell's challenge could be deemed "careless" as he tackled the opponent. |
Though I thought I knew the laws fairly well, I'm surprised at some of these and would expect to see a player who deliberately strikes, kicks or spits at an opponent not just to concede a direct free kick (or a penalty if in the box) but also to be sent off. | | | |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 22:08 - Nov 28 with 4988 views | TVOS1907 |
| Tuesday`s penalty on 21:37 - Nov 28 by D_Dale |
Though I thought I knew the laws fairly well, I'm surprised at some of these and would expect to see a player who deliberately strikes, kicks or spits at an opponent not just to concede a direct free kick (or a penalty if in the box) but also to be sent off. |
He will be . That's listed under the section for yellow/red card offences. | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
