Ref (2 Viewers)

[Sky Blue Pete]

The ball is closer! He’s being helpful. It’s better than a striker shooting the ball into the net after the whistle and that’s never penalised.

That’s right it’s dissent by action

 

---

[Robinshio]

it wasnt dissent, maybe frustration as he kept the ball nearby, but not dissent -

 

[skyblu3sk]

Kicking the ball against the ad hoardings so it bounces back closer than it was is not kicking the ball away and I’ll die on this hill.

Have you checked in with @hill83 that he's cool with it?

 

[Calista]

The ball is closer! He’s being helpful.

LOL

 

[Ricketts]

He got booked for kicking the ball away. Nowhere near as bad as their player blasting it into singers corner

He didn’t really blast it though. More chipped it into the crowd to get the multi-ball

 

[Ricketts]

it wasnt dissent, maybe frustration as he kept the ball nearby, but not dissent -

Palmer’s kick was dissent all day long. I can see why he disagreed.

 

[David O'Day]

He didn’t really blast it though. More chipped it into the crowd to get the multi-ball

still no need to do it, he can just tap it off the pitch

was funny how upset he was and how it rattled him after

 

[wingy]

Palmer got booked for kicking the ball away. I don't think it was dissent at the decision. I think Palmer was more frustrated at fucking up a good opportunity through poor ball control. Moments later he approached the ref in a lull in play and appeared to explain his actions.

Whether it was a foul or not is irrelevant. If you react like that and kick the ball away with such aggression it is a booking all day long.

Consistency is what is the argument here? One of theirs did it,no sanction?

 

[Nick]

He didn’t really blast it though. More chipped it into the crowd to get the multi-ball

Was a toe poke

 

[WestEndAgro]

Ref watch 11.30 on Sky Sports News, with Dermot Gallagher.
Surely they will be in a discussion regarding the penalty.

 

[SBAndy]

Pop me down in the ‘can see why it’s given but the law is an arse’ camp.

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Ref watch 11.30 on Sky Sports News, with Dermot Gallagher.
Surely they will be in a discussion regarding the penalty.

That just covers the Premier League whenever I’ve seen it. May talk about it though as it was on Sky.

 

[bluesky88]

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

View attachment 33394View attachment 33396

That picture makes me wonder whether the follow through is necessary

 

[Ricketts]

The only one thing I will say is that we’ve had two days and 600 angles and still discussing it, the ref had one.

 

[Calista]

That picture makes me wonder whether the follow through is necessary

It makes me wonder whether their player could have pulled out a lot quicker, having clearly been beaten to the ball by a good yard.

 

[Calista]

The two pictures are interesting. Did the ref, from his angle, even realise that Thomas played the ball? The subsequent ricochet towards the goal line might have made it look like their player got there first before being scythed down. Very different from the reality.

 

[David O'Day]

That picture makes me wonder whether the follow through is necessary

what else is he meant to do?

 

[wingy]

It makes me wonder whether their player could have pulled out a lot quicker, having clearly been beaten to the ball by a good yard.

You can see DH starting to take evasive action I think.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

what else is he meant to do?

Not put his leg about thigh height to clear the ball
We are going round in circles though

 

[skybluecam]

It makes me wonder whether their player could have pulled out a lot quicker, having clearly been beaten to the ball by a good yard.

This is what gets me. That was always Thomas’ ball, he gets there miles before KDH. It’s not like your usual 50/50 where you have to be very mindful of contact.

 

[Calista]

You can see DH starting to take evasive action I think.

Yes, but curiously he then continues, ensuring contact inside the area

It doesn't matter at all now of course, but it's still interesting from the point of view of the laws of the game.

In real time and in all the replays and stills I've seen, it's their player who arrives late. You obviously can't lunge through the ball when a player is in the firing line of that lunge, even if you do get the ball as well as the man. But here Thomas lunges at the ball well before the other player arrives, and IMO his leg position is entirely natural in clearing it. KDH gets there second and 'recklessly' charges it down, initiating the contact.

 

[Nick]

Not put his leg about thigh height to clear the ball
We are going round in circles though

But that's where the ball was? When you kick through a ball and follow through it might be at knee height.

Let's just stop kicking footballs

 

[Calista]

View attachment 33394View attachment 33396

Milan is definitely not guilty, as you can tell by his halo

 

[wingy]

Yes, but curiously he then continues, ensuring contact inside the area

It doesn't matter at all now of course, but it's still interesting from the point of view of the laws of the game.

In real time and in all the replays and stills I've seen, it's their player who arrives late. You obviously can't lunge through the ball when a player is in the firing line of that lunge, even if you do get the ball as well as the man. But here Thomas lunges at the ball well before the other player arrives, and IMO his leg position is entirely natural in clearing it. KDH gets there second and 'recklessly' charges it down, initiating the contact.

Oh you don't have to convince me!
As I've said before you can see re Thomas's foot turning he doesn't get the studs but the side ,heel of the boot!

 

[Nick]

Well yeah he needs to lift his leg to kick it.

That picture makes me wonder whether the follow through is necessary

What if a defender had collided with ohare as he was in the middle of vollying it with his leg up?

 

[MalcSB]

Just watched City Unseen, and the penalty decision at full speed from a low angle looks absolutely nailed on. From the stand you could see Thomas get the ball (regardless of the follow through), you can see it int he replay from behind the goal, but from the refs eye view level it looked nailed on.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

What about from the linesmans' view?

Wait a minute - (a) he was crap and (b) they don't actually do anything these days, do they?

 

[MalcSB]

Yeah he kicked it in anger at the refs decision, it was for dissent.

To be fair, there has been a new directives on kicking the ball away is more around time wasting:

Time wasting: Any attempt at time wasting will result in a mandatory yellow card. This will include kicking the ball away, walking/running off with the ball, interfering with an opponent taking a free-kick etc.



Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

Does the etc include anything about goalkeepers, e.g. dropping to the floor unnecessarily?

 

[Adge]

What about from the linesmans' view?

Wait a minute - (a) he was crap and (b) they don't actually do anything these days, do they?

The Assistant who is on the far side 40-50 yards away has a better view than the referee who is 10 yards away? Hmmmm.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Does the etc include anything about goalkeepers, e.g. dropping to the floor unnecessarily?

Winds me up so much

 

[MalcSB]

The Assistant who is on the far side 40-50 yards away has a better view than the referee who is 10 yards away? Hmmmm.

It's the angle, the ref sees the incident from the back and, as mentioned somewhere previously, may not have seen Thomas get the ball first. I was pretty much in line with the play and could clearly see that Thomas had got the ball first, as could everyone around me and as should the linesman as well. So yes, the linesman had a better view of the incident.

The linesman on this side of the pitch was a waste of a match fee to be honest.

 

[Adge]

Everyone going around in circles regarding this. Does anyone think that Thomas knew exactly what he was doing by doing a crafty follow through on KDH? I think Thomas knew exactly what he was doing-took a gamble and unfortunately it caught up with him.
McFadz is the type of no nonsense player also that would have probably done the same-they are both cut from the same cloth.

 

[MalcSB]

Everyone going around in circles regarding this. Does anyone think that Thomas knew exactly what he was doing by doing a crafty follow through on KDH? I think Thomas knew exactly what he was doing-took a gamble and unfortunately it caught up with him.
McFadz is the type of no nonsense player also that would have probably done the same-they are both cut from the same cloth.

If Thomas had the speed of thought to do that, he could equally have had the speed of thought to have not considered his action to be reckless.

 

[wingy]

Everyone going around in circles regarding this. Does anyone think that Thomas knew exactly what he was doing by doing a crafty follow through on KDH? I think Thomas knew exactly what he was doing-took a gamble and unfortunately it caught up with him.
McFadz is the type of no nonsense player also that would have probably done the same-they are both cut from the same cloth.

No!

 

[mark82]

Everyone going around in circles regarding this. Does anyone think that Thomas knew exactly what he was doing by doing a crafty follow through on KDH? I think Thomas knew exactly what he was doing-took a gamble and unfortunately it caught up with him.
McFadz is the type of no nonsense player also that would have probably done the same-they are both cut from the same cloth.

I've come to the opinion that penalty was probably the right decision, but no, don't think any part of it was intentional.