Shrimpsvoices

Just seen the 'so called' penalty from yesterday and froze the action exactly where Parrish made contact. No way was that in the area. The Torquay players momentum in the fall took him into the box but his fall started OUTSIDE of the area.

Another injustice this season.

I have just done the same thing and your right, contact was made OUTSIDE the area. They didn't show Shuker's red card, it would have been interesting to see if his 'stamp' was as deliberate as it's been made to sound?

It would still have been a sending off though, and Torquay may well still have scored from the free kick.

marky wrote:It would still have been a sending off though, and Torquay may well still have scored from the free kick.

They may have but less likely than from a 12 yard spot kick.

The camera never lies!

To be fair, that is a really tight call. You can't blame the referee for getting that decision wrong, especially at full speed. It is right on the edge of the box, 50/50 call for me.

i always say you win some you lose some with referees goes around comes around but i just do not agree with letter of the law by punishing a player twice with a sending off aswell


it must have been a long afternoon(weekend) for those who traveled 300 miles down there for the game to be spoilt after 10mins, i hope they still made a good weekend of it

[quote="DawZi"]i always say you win some you lose some with referees goes around comes around but i just do not agree with letter of the law by punishing a player twice with a sending off aswell


it must have been a long afternoon(weekend) for those who traveled 300 miles down there for the game to be spoilt after 10mins, i hope they still made a good weekend of it[/quote]

There are at least 4 on their way back at the moment with no doubt some stories to tell......

I was there, you can see my disgust after the rebound was scored (red shirt). What you can not see is that the ref waved away the penalty claim VEY VERY VERY strongly, clue in there players reaction , Then the old man of a lino flaged and gave it, the ref was closer and in my view had a better view, the Suker one was missed by all as the ball was on the other side of the pitch, but was given for stamping, if so I hope he gets hit with a very big fine as that is not wanted in the game.

We played some very good stuff and didn't deserve the 3-1 score line.

Still onwards and upwards and roll on Tuesday in a now must win game, I expect to see atleast 2 changes in defence

DawZi wrote:i always say you win some you lose some with referees goes around comes around but i just do not agree with letter of the law by punishing a player twice with a sending off aswell

3 times really. The pen, the sending off that affects that game, and then the next game.

Fifa denied the change in March 2010, but I think they will change it eventually.

Players may no longer be sent off for fouls which deny an obvious goal-scoring opportunity if the referee gives a penalty as well, under a proposal submitted to the game's rulemaking body.

There has been a growing chorus of opinion that the punishment is too harsh - a penalty, a red card for the defender and a subsequent suspension.

FIFA have submitted the item to the International FA Board meeting on March 6 and the outcome may be that the offence is downgraded to a yellow card if a penalty is awarded.

The IFAB agenda says the FIFA submission is "to discuss sending-off offences, particularly the triple punishment (penalty kick, red card, player suspension) that results when a player denies an obvious goal-scoring opportunity to the opposing team".

The IFAB is made up of the four home nations, who each have one vote, and FIFA, who have four.

Any rule change needs a minimum of six votes in favour.

a yellow card and a penalty kick is surly sufficient justice in anyone's book?

freeze-frame may show the contact was just outside the area but it also shows that Andy did have an arm on their guy, so it was a foul and therefore red card. The fact that the linesman flagged to give the right decision (the foul) means he is doing his job. It was so close to the area that you can understand why that bit went against us. I watched it at full speed three times and wasn't surprised at the decision. In fact the only surprise is that the ref didn't give a decision to start with.

As for the straight red, for those who are a bit younger, the rule was introduced to stop 'professional fouls' where defenders literally rugby tackled attackers and only conceded a penalty and a yellow card or defenders dived full stretch to handle a ball that was going in the goal. That is pretty much long gone now. The rule could be changed and refs left with the 'option' of a straight red if they felt there was definite intent to stop a goal being scored.

Keith wrote:freeze-frame may show the contact was just outside the area but it also shows that Andy did have an arm on their guy, so it was a foul and therefore red card. The fact that the linesman flagged to give the right decision (the foul) means he is doing his job. It was so close to the area that you can understand why that bit went against us. I watched it at full speed three times and wasn't surprised at the decision. In fact the only surprise is that the ref didn't give a decision to start with.

As for the straight red, for those who are a bit younger, the rule was introduced to stop 'professional fouls' where defenders literally rugby tackled attackers and only conceded a penalty and a yellow card or defenders dived full stretch to handle a ball that was going in the goal. That is pretty much long gone now. The rule could be changed and refs left with the 'option' of a straight red if they felt there was definite intent to stop a goal being scored.

That was due to the tangle of legs caused by him cutting back infront of Pazzer and making him fall, so it was accidental. If your driving and get cut up who's to blame? you or the Twit who cuts infront of you?

outsider wrote:That was due to the tangle of legs caused by him cutting back infront of Pazzer and making him fall, so it was accidental. If your driving and get cut up who's to blame? you or the Twit who cuts infront of you?

If it had been the other way around, I'd have been calling for a penalty. I'm not saying there was intent to foul him in the 'professional foul' manner but if there is a tangle of legs and an arm on the back, then that's got to go against the player not in control of the ball.

From what I remember ( ) the liner put his flag up to his chest, indicating the ref should give a penalty and not just for the foul.

I was outside the box but it's very close had it watch it 4 times myself so it's unlucky but for once you can't put blame on the officials.

Red card, free kick. Simple as.