Our Penalty Decision

[33]

Foooks me off that our captain doesn't ask for a contested drop ball in these situations.

 

Time and again players just accept the soft option.

[darra]

11 hours ago, 33 said:

Foooks me off that our captain doesn't ask for a contested drop ball in these situations.

 

Time and again players just accept the soft option.

Not convinced Lees is the right man to be captain. Noticed yesterday as the players were stood in the tunnel the Chelsea captain on being told to go he shouted come on boys clapping his hands. Lees did nothing. In my opinion, I don't think he's comfortable in the role and as a result, his game has suffered. 

[cookeh]

To me it's very clearly a pen.

 

Ampadu makes the challenge and plants his foot, missing the ball.

Pessy then kicks Ampadu's leg, and that knocks it into the ball.

That makes it a trip on Pessy, since he took the man before the ball.

 

 

 

[dannytheowl]

1 hour ago, cookeh said:

To me it's very clearly a pen.

 

Ampadu makes the challenge and plants his foot, missing the ball.

Pessy then kicks Ampadu's leg, and that knocks it into the ball.

That makes it a trip on Pessy, since he took the man before the ball.

 

 

 

 

You're showing signs of unmitigated bias there chief 

[cookeh]

Just now, dannytheowl said:

 

You're showing signs of unmitigated bias there chief 

 

Does Ampadu touch the ball _before_ Pessy kicks him?

Slow-mo says no..

[Ever the pessimist]

Only just got round to seeing the replay - obviously the eventual decision was correct, but I feel JP was a bit naive in trying to take the shot on - had he been clever (cynical) and just nudged it forward then it was highly likely that he would indeed have been fouled. 

 

Hindsight is wonderful I guess. 

[punkskaphil]

9 minutes ago, Ever the pessimist said:

Only just got round to seeing the replay - obviously the eventual decision was correct, but I feel JP was a bit naive in trying to take the shot on - had he been clever (cynical) and just nudged it forward then it was highly likely that he would indeed have been fouled. 

 

Hindsight is wonderful I guess. 

 

Just my own opinion, but in the position he found himself in I'd always want a player to try to score rather than try to buy a penalty.

[Ever the pessimist]

True. Perhaps I have been infected with the cynicism of footballers nowadays. 

[Northampton Owl]

1 minute ago, punkskaphil said:

 

Just my own opinion, but in the position he found himself in I'd always want a player to try to score rather than try to buy a penalty.

But it was pelupessy on the ball. It's probably not going to go on target even if he does take the shot. 

[alanharper]

2 hours ago, cookeh said:

 

Does Ampadu touch the ball _before_ Pessy kicks him?

Slow-mo says no..

 

So you're saying that Pelupessy kicks their player - but it should have been a penalty to us?

[nevthelodgemoorowl]

3 hours ago, cookeh said:

To me it's very clearly a pen.

 

Ampadu makes the challenge and plants his foot, missing the ball.

Pessy then kicks Ampadu's leg, and that knocks it into the ball.

That makes it a trip on Pessy, since he took the man before the ball.

 

 

 

At last penalty all day long ! Recognising of course that 20 years ago a corner would have been awarded. 

[cookeh]

38 minutes ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said:

At last penalty all day long ! Recognising of course that 20 years ago a corner would have been awarded. 

 

The other telling thing is the direction of travel of the ball. If Ampadu had got the ball, it would have gone in some direction resembling the direction he kicked his foot out in. Instead if goes off at right angles to his foot, because that's the direction Pessy kicks Ampadu's foot in.

[nevthelodgemoorowl]

1 hour ago, cookeh said:

 

The other telling thing is the direction of travel of the ball. If Ampadu had got the ball, it would have gone in some direction resembling the direction he kicked his foot out in. Instead if goes off at right angles to his foot, because that's the direction Pessy kicks Ampadu's foot in.

Had the scenario been the same in a Liverpool v Man City game we would have seen a penalty awarded after a considerably longer period of waiting. My First instinct was pen. Then have a look. Then a second look. Then sure Pessis strike on goal had been blocked with contact on ball following Pessi striking defenders leg/foot into contact with ball. The ball running away at most peculiar angle as you say !

 

[bradowl]

Had they been no var we probably would have gone 1-0 in front instead of going behind within seconds, Chelsea would probably still have won game but there's a small chance they wouldn't have. 

 

If they're going to have var it has to be for all the games in a competition not just a few, Everton would probably be still in competition had they had var in there game. 

It's influencing who's going to win competition. 

 

If they're going to bring it then bring it in for all premier league games for a full season. 

[latemodelchild]

2 minutes ago, bradowl said:

Had they been no var we probably would have gone 1-0 in front instead of going behind within seconds, Chelsea would probably still have won game but there's a small chance they wouldn't have. 

 

If they're going to have var it has to be for all the games in a competition not just a few, Everton would probably be still in competition had they had var in there game. 

It's influencing who's going to win competition. 

 

If they're going to bring it then bring it in for all premier league games for a full season. 

This is the point I've been making all day to people who have no idea about football normally but are suddenly experts. Doing my nut. 

[Miffed]

19 hours ago, punkskaphil said:

 

Exactly my point. The correct decision would've been to change the decision from 'penalty' to 'corner'. The ball was out of play before the whistle was blown, so the third point doesn't even come into consideration.

 

I could be wrong but I think the part that is confusing people is:

 

It doesnt matter where the ball was when the referee blew his whistle. Its where the ball was for the incident that he blew the whistle for.

 

He blew it for the penalty claim. It doesnt matter if play continues for another few seconds...... It doesnt matter where the ball ends up. He blew for the penalty. What happens to the ball afterwards is irrelevant. The ref wouldnt say... The ball has gone out for a corner....therefore Im not blowing for a penalty.

 

[punkskaphil]

Perhaps you’re right. It’s so confusing, even in the language in the rulebook.

 

The bit I quoted from the rules regarding restarts does clearly say - even accepting the idea that what happens after the penalty decision is irrelevant - that a drop ball restarts the game if the original decision is not overturned. When the decision is overturned it says the game restarts with the new ‘correct’ decision. It seems odd that the ‘correct’ decision of a successful tackle then results in a drop-ball.

 

Could’ve been worse, I suppose. In theory, the tackle on JP could’ve ended up with the ball finding its way into the net, but if the ref had blown for a penalty it would’ve ended up with the goal disallowed, the penalty decision overturned, and Chelsea getting to clear with a drop ball. It’s an incredibly flawed set of rules.

[roaminowl]

45 minutes ago, punkskaphil said:

Perhaps you’re right. It’s so confusing, even in the language in the rulebook.

 

The bit I quoted from the rules regarding restarts does clearly say - even accepting the idea that what happens after the penalty decision is irrelevant - that a drop ball restarts the game if the original decision is not overturned. When the decision is overturned it says the game restarts with the new ‘correct’ decision. It seems odd that the ‘correct’ decision of a successful tackle then results in a drop-ball.

 

Could’ve been worse, I suppose. In theory, the tackle on JP could’ve ended up with the ball finding its way into the net, but if the ref had blown for a penalty it would’ve ended up with the goal disallowed, the penalty decision overturned, and Chelsea getting to clear with a drop ball. It’s an incredibly flawed set of rules.

 

I was going to say something similar. If the decision was penalty and the decision is overturned then what is the 'new' decision? Not a penalty? What is the correct way of restarting the game after the 'award' of not a penalty? It seems that the drop-ball is what was adopted but, as you say, it doesn't specifically say that in the rules.

[Lomas613]

On 27/01/2019 at 18:29, MysticOwl said:

Why was it a drop ball instead of a corner to us? 

My thought exactly at that same moment I often wonder if we had a corner we would have maybe had a headed chance or even miss leading to goal kick etc and the game wouldnt have panned through frustration up the other end immediately to then concede a penalty