Penalty Stats for 'Big 4'

Sizzler

Makes José's rant yesterday sound a tad flawed

Penalties awarded against Man Utd at Old Trafford this season: 3
Penalties awarded against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge this season: 0
Penalties awarded against Liverpool at Anfield this season: 0
Penalties awarded against Arsenal at the Emirates this season: 1

event

Sizzler wrote:

Makes José's rant yesterday sound a tad flawed

Penalties awarded against Man Utd at Old Trafford this season: 3
Penalties awarded against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge this season: 0
Penalties awarded against Liverpool at Anfield this season: 0
Penalties awarded against Arsenal at the Emirates this season: 1

but you would have to show us how many penalty incidents there have been to really make any point

gimmick

I wouldnt say flawed, simply as 2 stone wall penalties have been denied to Man Utd opposition, in Old Trafford in the last 2 games.

Sizzler

Looks like Man U defenders aren't the best when they go for tackles in the box (esp. in recent weeks :eek: ) but you cant tell me there hasnt been penalty shouts on the other 3 grounds all season long

The core point I was making was that penaltys are awarded at OT, even dodgy ones to the opposition. The one Bolton were awarded about a month ago was softer than a tub of butter on holidays in Texas.

Mitch Connor

gimmick wrote:

I wouldnt say flawed, simply as 2 stone wall penalties have been denied to Man Utd opposition, in Old Trafford in the last 2 games.

And one was denied to united in the same time.

PHB

Terry must have handballed at least five times in the box this year.

Necronomicon

Well, while there isn't any conspiracy against Chelsea like Mourinho seems to think, you can't deny that the incidents against Sheffield and 'Boro were stone-wallers.

Although, I wonder does Jose remember a certain Paul Scholes goal that was incorrectly disallowed against Porto in 2004.

leninbenjamin

Necromomicon wrote:

Well, while there isn't any conspiracy against Chelsea like Mourinho seems to think, you can't deny that the incidents against Sheffield and 'Boro were stone-wallers.

Although, I wonder does Jose remember a certain Paul Scholes goal that was incorrectly disallowed against Porto in 2004.

a game is without a controversial/potential-match-winning decision is becoming less and less frequent these days. overall i think it's just as Soccer becomes more and more high paced, quicker moving feet etc. etc. that the referees just can't keep up with what's going on mentally. A lot of these days I find it increasingly difficult to make my mind up on a decision without seeing multiple angles. And they do tend to even out, particularly over the length of a league season (How many times does Carvalho get away with pulling attackers shirts in the box, cynical little fouls to obstruct attackers etc.? He must be among the best professional foulers in the game. I remember Terry has made a number of handballs in the box as well over past seasons that have never been given either).So all in all, as infuriating as referees decisions can be at times they deserve some credit for at least giving it a go.

Jose anyway is just trying to deflect criticism away from his players onto him. It's a game a lot of managers play too.

Rikand

PHB wrote:

Terry must have handballed at least five times in the box this year.

Pfft! Van Der Sar has handballed more times in the box than anyone!

Mitch Connor

Rickylovesuall wrote:

Pfft! Van Der Sar has handballed more times in the box than anyone!

yeah, but if he used his head, games would have 20/30 minutes injury time cause he'd be needing treatment so much.

Sabre0001

Ended up missing match at weekend but saw a replay of one incident - Ole scoring with a cheeky steal from the goalie which was disallowed! No write-up has mentioned this but every one mentions the penalty (which should have been called)...Each write up describes it as a potential match winner!

I don't understand this whole conspiracy theory thing that is going on - doesnt hold water!

sofireland

It goes around i suppose, in recent years it was very hard to get a penalty at OT, this season there has been 3
Ref's don't have the benefit of seeing these things from 3/4 angles in super slow motion, like us armchair pundits!

sofireland

Sabre0001 wrote:

Ended up missing match at weekend but saw a replay of one incident - Ole scoring with a cheeky steal from the goalie which was disallowed! No write-up has mentioned this but every one mentions the penalty (which should have been called)...Each write up describes it as a potential match winner!

I don't understand this whole conspiracy theory thing that is going on - doesnt hold water!

According to the match commentary the rule is the keeper has to be allowed to strike the ball unimpeeded other wise its a foul for unsporting conduct.
Shame though cos it was cheeky from Ole
Andy Gray was going nuts, something like "punished for ingenuity!"

Daemonic

Sabre0001 wrote:

Ended up missing match at weekend but saw a replay of one incident - Ole scoring with a cheeky steal from the goalie which was disallowed! No write-up has mentioned this but every one mentions the penalty (which should have been called)...Each write up describes it as a potential match winner!

I don't understand this whole conspiracy theory thing that is going on - doesnt hold water!

They read out the rule on that incident on MOTD on Saturday. Paraphrasing the law says 'you cannot interfere with goalkeepers kickout/release of the ball.' The release of the ball from his hands until he kicks it is considered all one movement. So, if he had kicked the ball and then Ole had controlled it and scored thats fine but he hadn't so it was correctly disallowed. I assume as the rules are clear on it, it doesn't count as worthy of too much discussion in the media.

(Damn my slow typing)

Royale with Cheese

Daemonic wrote:

They read out the rule on that incident on MOTD on Saturday. Paraphrasing the law says 'you cannot interfere with goalkeepers kickout/release of the ball.' The release of the ball from his hands until he kicks it is considered all one movement. So, if he had kicked the ball and then Ole had controlled it and scored thats fine but he hadn't so it was correctly disallowed. I assume as the rules are clear on it, it doesn't count as worthy of too much discussion in the media.

This has all been said before, on more than one occasion in the past few seasons. I can't believe some United fans actually think that goal should stood.

Chong

IMO I would just like to say why do we always spend so much time analysing peno's and alike when the game is over. We can look at decisions that ref's have made till we are blue in the face, but when the final whistle is blown forget and move on.

Mitch Connor

Willstev wrote:

IMO I would just like to say why do we always spend so much time analysing peno's and alike when the game is over. We can look at decisions that ref's have made till we are blue in the face, but when the final whistle is blown forget and move on.

erm - cause it is part of the fun in being a footie fan. Football would be so dull if there weren't incidents to moan about, or we all just 'moved on' one the final whistle blew.

Sabre0001

Royale with Cheese wrote:

This has all been said before, on more than one occasion in the past few seasons. I can't believe some United fans actually think that goal should stood.

Sorry but I remember watching Nick Hancocks Video "Football Nightmares" (them were the days) and it had a few clips of goals being scored (and standing) while interfering mid-motion...

BaZmO*

So here we are on Monday afternoon talking about a supposed conspiracy against Chelsea instead of talking about how another Chelsea team under the leadership of Mourinho has failed to get a result at St. James's Park. And also, how last years champions have failed to capitalise on this years contenders dropping valuable points on Saturday. Just another smokescreen to deflect attention from himself and his team folks.

BKtje

According to the match commentary the rule is the keeper has to be allowed to strike the ball unimpeeded other wise its a foul for unsporting conduct.

Was watching Andy Gray on the last word last night. He made the comparison with the goal Dion Dublin scored against Shay Givens newcastle a few years back. Given had ball in hands, dropped it and was about to kick it when Dublin ran over and shot ball into the net. Given was never allowed to kick it so surely this should have fallen under the same rule if i read it correctly.

Just curious as to why one stood and the other didn't.

Royale with Cheese

B-K-DzR wrote:

Was watching Andy Gray on the last word last night. He made the comparison with the goal Dion Dublin scored against Shay Givens newcastle a few years back. Given had ball in hands, dropped it and was about to kick it when Dublin ran over and shot ball into the net. Given was never allowed to kick it so surely this should have fallen under the same rule if i read it correctly.

Just curious as to why one stood and the other didn't.

Yeah but he'll conveniently ignore the two times Thierry Henry did the EXACT same thing as ole over the last couple of seasons, with both goals being disallowed. Andy Gray really is a moron

Chong

Andy Gray really is a moron

You truly have hit the nail on the head.

stovelid

Sabre0001 wrote:

I don't understand this whole conspiracy theory thing that is going on - doesnt hold water!

Agreed.

Why would any ambitious referee refuse to award penos at OT when everybody (media, fans, managers) are just watching and waiting for it to happen. Think beyond your prejudices FFS.

event

B-K-DzR wrote:

Was watching Andy Gray on the last word last night. He made the comparison with the goal Dion Dublin scored against Shay Givens newcastle a few years back. Given had ball in hands, dropped it and was about to kick it when Dublin ran over and shot ball into the net. Given was never allowed to kick it so surely this should have fallen under the same rule if i read it correctly.

Just curious as to why one stood and the other didn't.

rather simple:

shay given did have the option to kick the ball, but he chose to kick it from the ground. Its not under his control anymore. If they choose to kick it from their hands, you cant touch it until they kick it.

andy gray is just being a tool, he knows the rules. You cant kick the ball from the keepers hands and get waya with it, you have to allow him to complete the kicking motion.

Sabre0001 wrote:

Sorry but I remember watching Nick Hancocks Video "Football Nightmares" (them were the days) and it had a few clips of goals being scored (and standing) while interfering mid-motion...

so?

just cos it was allowed before doesnt mean it was right. the ref's got it wrong on those occasions

leninbenjamin

Daemonic wrote:

They read out the rule on that incident on MOTD on Saturday. Paraphrasing the law says 'you cannot interfere with goalkeepers kickout/release of the ball.' The release of the ball from his hands until he kicks it is considered all one movement. So, if he had kicked the ball and then Ole had controlled it and scored thats fine but he hadn't so it was correctly disallowed. I assume as the rules are clear on it, it doesn't count as worthy of too much discussion in the media.

(Damn my slow typing)

does the rule explicitly say that from when the goalkeeper releases the ball to when he kicks it is all one movement or is it implied?

edit the the only rule i can find on the web (In theFA.com laws of the game) states

An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player, in the opinion of the referee:...

3. prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands

anyone got a better link?

PHB

Whats funny is, the thing Mourinho was bitching about was a Carr handball, which is why I find it so amusing, considering the actions of Terry

Chelsea played ****, and people are starting to see through his smokescreen, just like they did for Fergie. Fergie has changed his tactics though, and its working pretty well.

Sabre0001

event wrote:

rather simple:
so?

just cos it was allowed before doesnt mean it was right. the ref's got it wrong on those occasions

I'm just explaining where I, and possibly others, were confused about the ruling...Also nothing was mentioned in those clips about it being a grey area or not allowed at all...Not trying to say that the ref was wrong, just illustrating.

LostinBlanch

The NEW RULES OF FOOTBALL.

1) You must ignore facts that do not support your view. ( 3 penalties against United at Old Trafford this season, 0 Penalties against Chelsea at Stamford bridge).
2) If a Referee gives a decision you do not like you allege either a) you saw the opposing Manager enter the Referee's Dressing Room or b) you allege that the referee told your players that they needed to be sorted out.
3) Death threats are allowed against any referee who gives a decision against Chelsea. This action will be called Frisking.
4) Death threats are allowed against any opponent who injures a Chelsea player while going for the ball. This action will be called Hunting.
5)Each player shall have a cousin on TV to bring attention to the fact that his cousin is a world class player. This action will be called Franking.
6) The Captain of your team is allowed make racist comments to opponents when he is also the Captain of England.
7) The Captain of your team is allowed pull, push, and have opponents block tackled American Football style, however any contact with your Captain should result in a Penalty for Chelsea.
8) Every team should have one Gay Footballer but no girls allowed.
9) All blatant dives by Chelsea players should result in a booking for the nearest opponent.
10) There should be no Drug Testing of any player who's club is owned by a Russian billionaire.
11) Chelsea are allowed to choose one player from their next opponents who will be the subject of transfer speculation linking that player with Chelsea in the days leading up to the game. In the case of an FA Cup semi final that rule extends to Managers.

cournioni

Sounds like Mourinho is trying to get Ferguson to do a Keegan. Doubt if he'll take the bate somehow.

The Muppet

LostinBlanch wrote:

The NEW RULES OF FOOTBALL.

1) You must ignore facts that do not support your view. ( 3 penalties against United at Old Trafford this season, 0 Penalties against Chelsea at Stamford bridge).
2) If a Referee gives a decision you do not like you allege either a) you saw the opposing Manager enter the Referee's Dressing Room or b) you allege that the referee told your players that they needed to be sorted out.
3) Death threats are allowed against any referee who gives a decision against Chelsea. This action will be called Frisking.
4) Death threats are allowed against any opponent who injures a Chelsea player while going for the ball. This action will be called Hunting.
5)Each player shall have a cousin on TV to bring attention to the fact that his cousin is a world class player. This action will be called Franking.
6) The Captain of your team is allowed make racist comments to opponents when he is also the Captain of England.
7) The Captain of your team is allowed pull, push, and have opponents block tackled American Football style, however any contact with your Captain should result in a Penalty for Chelsea.
8) Every team should have one Gay Footballer but no girls allowed.
9) All blatant dives by Chelsea players should result in a booking for the nearest opponent.
10) There should be no Drug Testing of any player who's club is owned by a Russian billionaire.
11) Chelsea are allowed to choose one player from their next opponents who will be the subject of transfer speculation linking that player with Chelsea in the days leading up to the game. In the case of an FA Cup semi final that rule extends to Managers.

LOL Classic

I wondered why the Gunners got rid of Campbell and Reyes yet kept Freddie . They must have got wind of the new rules.

DerekD Goldfish

B-K-DzR wrote:

Was watching Andy Gray on the last word last night. He made the comparison with the goal Dion Dublin scored against Shay Givens newcastle a few years back. Given had ball in hands, dropped it and was about to kick it when Dublin ran over and shot ball into the net. Given was never allowed to kick it so surely this should have fallen under the same rule if i read it correctly.

Just curious as to why one stood and the other didn't.

Its quite clear why

marius

LostinBlanch wrote:

The NEW RULES OF FOOTBALL.

1) You must ignore facts that do not support your view. ( 3 penalties against United at Old Trafford this season, 0 Penalties against Chelsea at Stamford bridge).
2) If a Referee gives a decision you do not like you allege either a) you saw the opposing Manager enter the Referee's Dressing Room or b) you allege that the referee told your players that they needed to be sorted out.
3) Death threats are allowed against any referee who gives a decision against Chelsea. This action will be called Frisking.
4) Death threats are allowed against any opponent who injures a Chelsea player while going for the ball. This action will be called Hunting.
5)Each player shall have a cousin on TV to bring attention to the fact that his cousin is a world class player. This action will be called Franking.
6) The Captain of your team is allowed make racist comments to opponents when he is also the Captain of England.
7) The Captain of your team is allowed pull, push, and have opponents block tackled American Football style, however any contact with your Captain should result in a Penalty for Chelsea.
8) Every team should have one Gay Footballer but no girls allowed.
9) All blatant dives by Chelsea players should result in a booking for the nearest opponent.
10) There should be no Drug Testing of any player who's club is owned by a Russian billionaire.
11) Chelsea are allowed to choose one player from their next opponents who will be the subject of transfer speculation linking that player with Chelsea in the days leading up to the game. In the case of an FA Cup semi final that rule extends to Managers.

hilarious......(unless you are a chelsea fan obviously)....

do one for UTD too will you.....I want to see if it is still as funny if it is being done to my club;)

5starpool

It makes sense that the top 4 get less penalties given against them at home as the ball is not that frequently in their box. Refs are really all pussies who give in to the baying masses.

/ends generalisation.