Poll: Greenlizard0 PL & Championship Football Thread ** spoilers ** [11th - 13th July 2020]
- Thread starter BaZ87
- Start date
Took me 5 minutes to realise what was wrong tooIs the alcohol starting to catch up mate
Should have had at least 1 pen and their goal was from a free-kick that wasn't but we only have ourselves to blame. We should have been 4 or 5 up before they scored.
The challenge on Robertson was a clear pen. The Burnley defender brushed the ball but doesn't dispossess him and then clears him out with his follow through.
Because VAR makes the correct calls?
Unfortunately you get stupid pundits that think if you graze the ball it can't be a foul. Robertson was 100% in possession of the ball and got wiped out with the Burnley players follow through. How is it anything other than a foul?
Really good challenge? You're joking now.
He takes a wild swipe, grazes the ball (which didn't move it from Robertson) and then wipes Robertson out.
I've watched the replay, the ball is right in front of Robertson, literally 1 foot away. Robertson is running straight onto the ball and he gets wiped out.
Other than the fact that he's grazed the ball (which too many people mistakenly think that means it can't be a foul), how can that be anymore a foul.
Literally the last post in that thread is me saying it was clearly a penalty.
I'm not sure we had too many difficulties getting through Burnley's defence to be honest. We had enough chances to have won the game 3 or 4 times over but some lazy finishing (and or shooting when another pass should have been played) and good goalkeeping should have been the difference.
A penny for Werner's thoughts as he watches Chelsea try their best to blow a CL spot.
Lots of people will say it's not a penalty though but mainly because they don't understand the rules and think because "he got the ball first" it can't be a foul. That's nothing more than a myth. It doesn't surprise me that VAR didn't overrule it because VAR for these decisions are a joke 99% of the time but it's a clear foul - the ball is right in front of Robertson and he gets wiped out.
Just quickly searching 'Robertson penalty' on twitter and there's far far more people saying it was a penalty than not - obviously it's almost entirely Liverpool supporters commenting but the first two search results were Arsenal and Real Madrid supporters saying it was pen.
Lots of people will say it's not a penalty though but mainly because they don't understand the rules and think because "he got the ball first" it can't be a foul. That's nothing more than a myth. It doesn't surprise me that VAR didn't overrule it because VAR for these decisions are a joke 99% of the time but it's a clear foul - the ball is right in front of Robertson and he gets wiped out.
If he actually dispossesses the attacker, yes but that wasn't the case here. The Burnley player was in possession, is about to lose the ball and takes a wild swipe and ends up grazing the ball right into Robertson's path. Robertson is only in possession of the ball after the touch from the Burnley player and is then taken out.
Possibly but I'd guestimate that only 30% of all penalties are ever given anyway. I'm sure that even Utd fans, with their 150 pens this season, can think of several clear penalties that haven't been given for them this season. Just like the Kane appeal from the other day and countless others, it was a foul today but officials are scared of giving penalties and will look for excuses not to give them. It's human nature to avoid making a big call but unfortunately (and something I've banged on about for years) it plays a big part in the whole diving/simulation situation we see now. Attackers can't just be fouled to win pens now, they have to be seen to be absolutely smashed and left with a broken leg for a foul to be awarded.
It's not the case. 2 seconds on google and I can tell you that the 3 judges are Rui Botica Santos from Portugal, Professor Ulrich Haas of Germany and Andrew McDougall from France.
There is a small problem with that rob, all other teams don't have trillions of oil money to spend.
It does matter how much money you've got though rob because a smaller PL team cannot afford to spend anymore than they make because they're not backed by an Arab state.
There's a handful that can and will, but these handful are in the same boat as City in not wanting FFP. These clubs sticking 2 fingers up at UEFA and ignoring FFP doesn't solve anything for the clubs that support and adhere to FFP.
He said he's really confident
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...-confident-Manchester-City-Europe-season.html
Rob you're missing the point here. It's clubs like Real, Barca and Bayern (along with Liverpool, Utd and Arsenal) that pushed for FFP to be implemented in the current form. These clubs don't have owners that either can or will pump cash into their clubs to spend over and above what they generate. They're not going to break FFP rules.
edit: When UEFA first stated talking about financial controls they wanted to put regulations on debt. Clubs could make as much losses as they liked but as long as they weren't in debt it was fine but the big sides didn't want that, they wanted regulations that protected themselves from another Chelsea, City, PSG coming along. They wanted a set-up that made it as cheap as possible for them to keep their spot at the top table.
It could just be bravado, after all City have been very strongly proclaiming their innocence on this for the past 6 years and it's not stopped it getting this far. Pep coming out with this so close to the verdict made me wonder if he knows something. It has been reported that both City and UEFA will get told the verdict before it's made public but supposedly that's on the day rather than a week before.
I'll ask you next week and you'll say it's a pen. You change your mind more than you change your pants Rob.
All MOTD pundits said it was a penalty.