The Football.....

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

cisamcgu

Legendary Member
Location
Merseyside-ish
The penalty was obviously a penalty because after review the referee gave a penalty :smile:
 
... I've watched the replays, and it was absolutely a penalty.

He missed the ball, and made contact (with studs) with Kanes ankle/foot. That was always going to be given.

It may have been a genuine attempt to get the ball, but so are most fouls in professional football, they are just mistimed.

I was amazed they gave a pen, but that's because I've never seen them given for similar challenges; defenders blocking shots are generally given immunity, like goalkeepers are always protected by the ref.

But the defender:
- could easily blocked the shot without leading with his boot,
- went in studs up, which has been a red flag for years now,
- went in very high.

Although I think we were fortunate, this wasn't a situation where I was embarassed that my team got a "wrong" decision go in their favour.
(And I'm old enough to have seen plenty of bad decisions influence England defeats!!!)
 

Electric_Andy

Heavy Metal Fan
Location
Plymouth
I was amazed they gave a pen, but that's because I've never seen them given for similar challenges; defenders blocking shots are generally given immunity, like goalkeepers are always protected by the ref.

But the defender:
- could easily blocked the shot without leading with his boot,
- went in studs up, which has been a red flag for years now,
- went in very high.

Although I think we were fortunate, this wasn't a situation where I was embarassed that my team got a "wrong" decision go in their favour.
(And I'm old enough to have seen plenty of bad decisions influence England defeats!!!)

Yes I'd agree. We were lucky to get the penalty; some refs wouldn't have given it. But going in studs up with your boot is not the best way to block a shot, so the ref might have thought it was an attempt to impede Kane's foot rather than make contact with the ball?
 

albion

Guest
Mistimed tackles nearly always result in free kicks.

The only difference here is that it was a high tackle. The referee pundit was caught out this time by too quickly finding a technical reason to agree with the initial judgement. The initial judgement of course would non have fully seen the contacts.
Pus the ITV pundit was being his usual self, ITV often being more enjoyable with sound off.
 
Last edited:

AndyRM

XOXO
Location
North Shields
Yes I'd agree. We were lucky to get the penalty; some refs wouldn't have given it. But going in studs up with your boot is not the best way to block a shot, so the ref might have thought it was an attempt to impede Kane's foot rather than make contact with the ball?

Well he didn't, did he. He needed intervention from VAR.
 

Dave7

Legendary Member
Location
Cheshire
Yes I'd agree. We were lucky to get the penalty; some refs wouldn't have given it. But going in studs up with your boot is not the best way to block a shot, so the ref might have thought it was an attempt to impede Kane's foot rather than make contact with the ball?

There were 3 of us watching the game.
One said definite penalty.
One said definitely NOT a penalty.
I am in the middle but think we were lucky.
 

srj10

Guru
Location
greenock
VAR is a lottery, I refer anybody who disagrees to the non penalty in the Scotland Hungary match, diabolical decision. I am so proud that my club Greenock Morton were the only team to vote against the introduction of VAR in the Scottish leagues.
 

Slick

Guru
VAR is a lottery, I refer anybody who disagrees to the non penalty in the Scotland Hungary match, diabolical decision. I am so proud that my club Greenock Morton were the only team to vote against the introduction of VAR in the Scottish leagues.

Well done Morton, but I really can't see it surviving in its current form into next season. Although to be fair, history tells us otherwise. :crazy:
 

AndyRM

XOXO
Location
North Shields
FB_IMG_1720704544863.jpg
 
Top Bottom