Herman Hreidarsson

HalloweenJack

What do people think of him after yesterday's incident?

To recap: Portsmouth were awarded a penalty against Burnley when he went down in the box. Replays have shown he wasn't touched, although a leg was swung near him. Hreidarsson just fell over. It could easily be seen as a dive from him. He didn't ask for the penalty when he was on the ground though.

The ref was about ten yards away, iirc, and gave a pen immediately, waving away any protests. Portsmouth missed the peno but won 2-0 in the end.

Now, the interesting part. In his post-match interviews to Sky and BBC, Hreidarsson said he fell over and it wasn't a peno. This is why he didn't claim for it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_prem/8390381.stm

"It wasn't a penalty. I was waiting for the kick but it never came. It wasn't a dive, it's not what I'm about, but it wasn't a penalty."

However, if he knew he wasn't fouled, why didn't he go up to the ref and correct him after the peno was awarded? Instead, he got up and let Portsmouth take the kick.

My opinion is he's a footballer who is chancing his arm to see if he gets away with it, exactly the same as Henry. I don't hold it against him, as an awful lot of them would do the same thing in his situation. It also reinforces my belief that incidents, like the one in Paris, are all part of the game and are inescapable due to ref's unsightedness at times and the dishonesty of players.

But surely, those who complained about Henry's cheating and getting away with it will be equally outraged at Hreidarsson? Will there be a media/public/Burnley supporter backlash against him, similar to the one against Henry, as he cheated and didn't correct the ref who made the wrong decision?

And if there isn't, (as far as I'm aware there hasn't been one) why not? Where is the line drawn?

I'm genuinely interested in this, though I am cynical at the same time and I'm aware my post comes across that way.

JPA

He fell but he didn't purposely cheat like Henry.
The only difference between this and other penalty incidents is that he is talking about it so openly and honestly.

GLaDOS

If he was honest he would have taken it and tapped it to the keeper

HalloweenJack

But why didn't he correct the ref? He knows it wasn't a penalty but he still let it be taken.

Also, this bit:

I was waiting for the kick but it never came.

makes me think he wanted a reason to go down. When he didn't get it, he dived and was given a penalty.

JPA

HalloweenJack wrote: »

But why didn't he correct the ref? He knows it wasn't a penalty but he still let it be taken.

Because soccer is a flawed sport where winning is everything. There's no need to pick on him. This happens all the time, it's just that he is willing to talk about it openly.

Frisbee

He fell over, didn't claim and then immediately got back to his feet to challenge for the ball and it was hoofed away.

It wasn't a dive.

Also there's a completely different situation whether it leads to Portsmouth missing a peno against Burnely and France unfairly knocking Ireland out of the World Cup.

Both decisions were wrong
One was Cheating
One was a mistake by the referee

But do you really think that the media backlash will be the same as the Henry incident? Really?

SantryRed

I'm assuming you mean Hreidarsson was cheating and the Henry handball was a referee's mistake?

Vurnon San Benito

ScienceNerd wrote: »

If he was honest he would have taken it and tapped it to the keeper

Herman Hreidarsson taking a penalty?
Oh please....

HalloweenJack

Frisbee wrote: »

Also there's a completely different situation whether it leads to Portsmouth missing a peno against Burnely and France unfairly knocking Ireland out of the World Cup.

So the stage it's on is more important? Ok, that's fine. I accept that as a reason and thanks for you honesty.

Frisbee wrote:

Both decisions were wrong
One was Cheating
One was a mistake by the referee

I believe both were cheating and both were ref mistakes.

Frisbee wrote:

But do you really think that the media backlash will be the same as the Henry incident? Really?

Not for a second. It's already been forgotten, as I expected.

But my question is why?

Irish and English media led the world to believe that we were moral crusaders to save the game of football, but now when a lower-profile incident happens, and in Ireland's case, one that doesn't involved us, it's ignored by the media.

Frisbee

SantryRed wrote: »

I'm assuming you mean Hreidarsson was cheating and the Henry handball was a referee's mistake?

No, Henry cheated by using his hand.

The one yesterday was a referee error. Hreidarsson didn't even claim for the penalty, as soon as he fell over he got straight back up and made to go for the ball. The referee should have realised it wasn't a penalty considering the foot swung about a foot away from Hreidarsson and there was no claims for a penalty from him.

Frisbee

HalloweenJack wrote: »

So the stage it's on is more important? Ok, that's fine. I accept that as a reason and thanks for you honesty.

Sorry that's not how it meant to come across.

I think they are both equally important regardless of the stage that it happens on.

I just don't expect there to me as much of a media backlash for Pompey/Burnley as Ireland/France.

Iago

HalloweenJack wrote: »

But surely, those who complained about Henry's cheating and getting away with it will be equally outraged at Hreidarsson? Will there be a media/public/Burnley supporter backlash against him, similar to the one against Henry, as he cheated and didn't correct the ref who made the wrong decision?

And if there isn't, (as far as I'm aware there hasn't been one) why not? Where is the line drawn?

That's easy, the line is drawn right about where it negatively affects the team or country you support of course.

bigstar

Frisbee wrote: »

No, Henry cheated by using his hand.

The one yesterday was a referee error. Hreidarsson didn't even claim for the penalty, as soon as he fell over he got straight back up and made to go for the ball. The referee should have realised it wasn't a penalty considering the foot swung about a foot away from Hreidarsson and there was no claims for a penalty from him.

no i cant buy that. he doesnt tell the ref he fell, hes cheated imo. the ref makes a mistake in both cases but the players have to be held responsible for their actions or failure to act. same with gerrard yesterday, it just gives players more reason to dive when a player comes close to them.

teh only reason this is coming up now is because of the french game. happens every week and its always defended as being part of the game. not the way ive ever played it.

ITT-Pat

ScienceNerd wrote: »

If he was honest he would have taken it and tapped it to the keeper

Nah then he'd be out of position, so he just went back to his own half and told Dindane to tap it to him

Horsefumbler

I've seen players on at least 2 occasions that i can remember( fowler and arshavin) both admit that they weren't fouled in box to ref after he awarded a peno and the ref still gave the peno anyway. So if this dude had admitted it to ref theres no guarantee the ref would have changed his mind.

Mmcd

Horsefumbler wrote: »

I've seen players on at least 2 occasions that i can remember( fowler and arshavin) both admit that they weren't fouled in box to ref after he awarded a peno and the ref still gave the peno anyway. So if this dude had admitted it to ref theres no guarantee the ref would have changed his mind.

All the more reason if you are probably still going to get it. You look all high and mighty and your team still benefits!

Tomthepost

HalloweenJack wrote: »

What do people think of him after yesterday's incident?



But surely, those who complained about Henry's cheating and getting away with it will be equally outraged at Hreidarsson? Will there be a media/public/Burnley supporter backlash against him, similar to the one against Henry, as he cheated and didn't correct the ref who made the wrong decision?

And if there isn't, (as far as I'm aware there hasn't been one) why not? Where is the line drawn?
.

One incident decided the result of a game which happened to be for qualification to the big tournament in the world which is only held every 4 years. France has a population of 62 million people. Ireland 4 million plus ex-pats all over the world. The majority of these people would have had an interest in the result.
The other incident happened in a match where your destiny is decided over a 36 game season. Decisions will go for you and against you over that time period and generally balance out. In this particular case it is completely irrelevant anyway as the offenders missed the penalty and won 2-0 anyway.
Unbelievable how these incidents can be put together in any context as far as Im concerned.

simonw

Tomthepost wrote: »

One incident decided the result of a game which happened to be for qualification to the big tournament in the world which is only held every 4 years. France has a population of 62 million people. Ireland 4 million plus ex-pats all over the world. The majority of these people would have had an interest in the result.
The other incident happened in a match where your destiny is decided over a 36 game season. Decisions will go for you and against you over that time period and generally balance out. In this particular case it is completely irrelevant anyway as the offenders missed the penalty and won 2-0 anyway.
Unbelievable how these incidents can be put together in any context as far as Im concerned.

Well said.

Bubs101

He's paid to get the club a result. Why would you just give away a 2/7 chance of scoring for an incident that will be forgotten very soon

Fratton Fred

There is no way the Hermanator dived, but there is also no way it was a peno.

I have seen much worse incidents than this (Rooney a few years ago at old trafford and Owen at Fratton Park in his Liverpool days spring to mine).

Usually though they even themselves out over the season.

mormank

i always thought a ref couldnt change his decision once he has made it. so even if herman did tell the ref it was a mistake he wouldnt have been able to reverse the decision. is this totally wrong?? it is what i have always believed.

Fratton Fred

mormank wrote: »

i always thought a ref couldnt change his decision once he has made it. so even if herman did tell the ref it was a mistake he wouldnt have been able to reverse the decision. is this totally wrong?? it is what i have always believed.

There was an incident a few seasons ago where there was a clear hnadball in the area. The ref awarded a penalty even though it was an attacker who had handled the ball (the forward remained tight lipped despite the defenders telling him to speak to the ref. Eventually the ref went and spoke to the linesman who told the ref what he had seen and the penalty was changed to a free kick to the defending team.

In this case, if the ref realises he has made a wrong decision,he can award a dropped ball I guess. As it was, Dindane's crap penalty sorted the issue anyway.

mormank

Fratton Fred wrote: »

There was an incident a few seasons ago where there was a clear hnadball in the area. The ref awarded a penalty even though it was an attacker who had handled the ball (the forward remained tight lipped despite the defenders telling him to speak to the ref. Eventually the ref went and spoke to the linesman who told the ref what he had seen and the penalty was changed to a free kick to the defending team.

In this case, if the ref realises he has made a wrong decision,he can award a dropped ball I guess. As it was, Dindane's crap penalty sorted the issue anyway.

oh right i gues i was wrong then. why on earth would ref's not change their decisons when the player tells thme they are wrong. ego or pride is the only reason i can think of..

Tomthepost

mormank wrote: »

oh right i gues i was wrong then. why on earth would ref's not change their decisons when the player tells thme they are wrong. ego or pride is the only reason i can think of..

See this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkELMdzR6is

BaZmO*

If only they had some technology available where they could replay incidents like this so the referee could make the right decision.

Mmcd

BaZmO* wrote: »

If only they had some technology available where they could replay incidents like this so the referee could make the right decision.

Nah thats too unrealistic - we need robot referees!