Crystal Palace V Liverpool 1:30 SKY

monkey9

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

A million people can all think a million things about what was in Benteke's head at the time or what his intentions were but it's all pure speculation. For some saying he was anticipating the tackle and it was therefore a dive (when he did in fact have his foot clipped) softens the blow/disappointment but ref's and linesmen can't make decisions based on speculation can they? They can only make decisions based on the facts they observe and on this occasion Delaney clipped Benteke's trailing foot tripping him in the box and it's a stone cold penalty.

Easy decision for the linesman who had the best angle to see it.

Absolutely. No blame towards the officials, it looked a blatant penalty in real time.

niallo27

gosplan wrote: »

Not being obtuse. Just saying he dived.

I just find the partisan reaction laughable.

The he 'anticipated contact/was entitled to go down/was at speed' type of comments.

I'm not judging Benteke, just saying it was a dive.

If it was a dive I would say it. I would love liverpool to win by cheating, this place would go mad but there was clear contact.

gosplan

niallo27 wrote: »

If it was a dive I would say it. I would love liverpool to win by cheating, this place would go mad but there was clear contact.

Sadly, no. If there was zero contact, it basically turns into...

'he had to get out of the way. Have you never been running at speed and had to change direction quickly?'




Again, it's a contact sport. Contact does not always equal knocking someone over. Benteke dived.

And that's fine, people do it all the time.

niallo27

gosplan wrote: »

Sadly, no. If there was zero contact, it basically turns into...

'he had to get out of the way. Have you never been running at speed and had to change direction quickly?'




Again, it's a contact sport. Contact does not always equal knocking someone over. Benteke dived.

And that's fine, people do it all the time.

Did you see the knee taking out Benteke. I think you may need to see it again

gosplan

niallo27 wrote: »

Did you see the knee taking out Benteke. I think you may need to see it again

I did. It didn't do anything to his other foot though. That's the one that he couldn't take the next step with.

Benteke felt a touch and stopped the whole running/staying upright thing.

Rediculous to say anything otherwise.

niallo27

gosplan wrote: »

I did. It didn't do anything to his other foot though. That's the one that he couldn't take the next step with.

Benteke felt a touch and stopped the whole running/staying upright thing.

Rediculous to say anything otherwise.

I don't know what to say to you really. Your entitled to your opinion. It's wrong but your entitled to it

gosplan

niallo27 wrote: »

I don't know what to say to you really. Your entitled to your opinion. It's wrong but your entitled to it

I think you're missing the point.

niallo27

niallo27 wrote: »

I don't know what to say to you really. Your entitled to your opinion. It's wrong but your entitled to it

Yeah, no idea what's he's trying to say. Benteke was fouled and a pen correctly given. Simple as that.

It was scored more importantly.

vetinari

I know every club's supporters will be biased on penalty incidents.
It gets a little embarrassing if you're not at least able to accurately describe what happened.

Benteke was clearly looking for contact.
You can see him take a look across the box and see no one is there.
Delaney made contact with his foot so he dived to the ground.
Loads of players do this, sometimes you get a penalty, sometimes you don't.

Arguing that Benteke was actually knocked over by the contact is daft though.
He clearly wasn't. You're not required as a Liverpool fan to say that he was knocked over.

gosplan

vetinari wrote: »

I know every club's supporters will be biased on penalty incidents.
It gets a little embarrassing if you're not at least able to accurately describe what happened.

Benteke was clearly looking for contact.
You can see him take a look across the box and see no one is there.
Delaney made contact with his foot so he dived to the ground.
Loads of players do this, sometimes you get a penalty, sometimes you don't.

Arguing that Benteke was actually knocked over by the contact is daft though.
He clearly wasn't. You're not required as a Liverpool fan to say that he was knocked over.

And this is all I'm trying to say.

If he was a defender trying to get back and that contact brought him down, you'd ask serious questions about his desire.

But like I said. People on boards will (and have) argued that players going over fresh air didn't dive.

At least the player actually touched Benteke.

Utopia Parkway

I think Benteke could probably have stayed on his feet but not many forwards these days who won't go down when they feel themselves get clipped in the box like that. Just the way it is now.

gosplan

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

I think Benteke could probably have stayed on his feet but not many forwards these days who won't go down when they feel themselves get clipped in the box like that. Just the way it is now.

No, the way the game is reffed demands that he gas to dive.

monkey9

gosplan wrote: »

And this is all I'm trying to say.

If he was a defender trying to get back and that contact brought him down, you'd ask serious questions about his desire.

But like I said. People on boards will (and have) argued that players going over fresh air didn't dive.

At least the player actually touched Benteke.

In fairness, you see that all the time. Defenders getting in front of the forward and then diving to get the free out and nothing is said. That happens in every match.

If it was Delaney's foot making contact with Benteke's foot, more would claim it was a penalty.

If it was the goalkeeper's hand making contact with Benteke's foot, more would claim it was a penalty.

But because it's Delaney's knee, it seems more unconventional. But it's still as much a penalty as the above examples.

I still don't think it's a penalty, but Delaney is to blame. Win the ball or just accept whatever the consequences are.

rob316

It's tough one for benteke, he looks to be on the way out of anfield in the summer so he needed to make an impact today. There was contact, soft or not it's a penalty.

Buford T. Justice XIX

It's pretty easy to see the supporters whose team didn't get a good result this weekend:D

And that's sweet too...

gosplan

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

It's pretty easy to see the supporters whose team didn't get a good result this weekend:D

And that's sweet too...

It's not always pool vrs Utd tbh. People can make decisions on things totally independently of the club they support.

Buford T. Justice XIX

gosplan wrote: »

It's not always pool vrs Utd tbh. People can make decisions on things totally independently of the club they support.

At, here now.

'Twas a penalty, clear as day.

Whatever section of your decision making is defective in not seeing what is clear as day is of no interest to me.

3 points, a bitter Pardew and other fans with twisted knickers is just such a tasty topping.

Cracking weekend of football all round.

niallo27

Clear pen by the lads on match of the day. I really can't understand people saying it's not a penalty.

gosplan

gosplan wrote: »

So he dived...and it's a penalty.

Which brings us back to this idea that football is a contact sport, except in the box, where any contact merits a dive and a deserved penalty.

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

At, here now.

'Twas a penalty, clear as day.

Whatever section of your decision making is defective in not seeing what is clear as day is of no interest to me.

3 points, a bitter Pardew and other fans with twisted knickers is just such a tasty topping.

Cracking weekend of football all round.

See previous post above.

He dived.

Loads of people say penalty because there was contact. Some might say it wasn't because the contact didn't cause him to fall. Doesn't really make a difference which way you go though.

gosplan

niallo27 wrote: »

Clear pen by the lads on match of the day. I really can't understand people saying it's not a penalty.

Firstly, the MOTD guys are full of sh1t. Have they said Vardy dived yet this year?

Like I said, picture a defender running back to make a goal line clearance or something. In a situation like that when staying on your feet is more important, you're saying that that touch on his back foot causes him to be unable to take another step??

The touch didn't make a difference and shouldn't have made him go down. I'm sure you guys play a lot of football and know that in games where diving isn't part of the standard practice that you get nicked and clipped all the time without going over.

All that said. Benteke HAD to go down there. Diving is professional. It's tough for the refs in real time too especially given how focused they are in holding defenders to account for any contact whatsoever.

Harry Palmr

It was an "ankle tap" type contact which when going full tilt will bring you down.

5starpool

He was always going down when he felt the contact. I don't think the contact on its own though brought him down.

gosplan

Harry Palmr wrote: »

It was an "ankle tap" type contact which when going full tilt will bring you down.

No it won't.

Watch a montage of tap tackles in rugby. You either have to knock one leg off the other or unbalance the player hugely.

Watch it again and think of what happens to the Irish rugby player that goes down like that after that contact.

The only way you could really claim it wasn't a dive is to say he caught him square on the ball of the ankle and it really hurt.

That might explain the collapse of his unaffected leg and the screamy expression that came on his face.

gosplan

5starpool wrote: »

He was always going down when he felt the contact. I don't think the contact on its own though brought him down.

Yes and he had to. That's the game.

But to suggest he didn't dive. Christ.

Like I said, Rob Kearney running for the English try line and THAT contact causes him to drop to his knees. He'd have to emigrate.

Potential Underachiever

gosplan wrote: »

Yes and he had to. That's the game.

But to suggest he didn't dive. Christ.

Like I said, Rob Kearney running for the English try line and THAT contact causes him to drop to his knees. He'd have to emigrate.

You are making good points, you are correct it was a dive and it was a penalty.

citytillidie

Reminds me of the game V Norwich were a defender makes a rash choice and attacker makes the most of it.

rob316

The constant comparing of Rugby to Football when it comes to tackles is boring.

niallo27

gosplan wrote: »

Firstly, the MOTD guys are full of sh1t. Have they said Vardy dived yet this year?

Like I said, picture a defender running back to make a goal line clearance or something. In a situation like that when staying on your feet is more important, you're saying that that touch on his back foot causes him to be unable to take another step??

The touch didn't make a difference and shouldn't have made him go down. I'm sure you guys play a lot of football and know that in games where diving isn't part of the standard practice that you get nicked and clipped all the time without going over.

All that said. Benteke HAD to go down there. Diving is professional. It's tough for the refs in real time too especially given how focused they are in holding defenders to account for any contact whatsoever.

Maybe you answered already but do you think it was a penalty though. I do agree strikers do go to ground easily but they have to because you wont get a free otherwise.

Buford T. Justice XIX

gosplan wrote: »

No it won't.

Watch a montage of tap tackles in rugby. You either have to knock one leg off the other or unbalance the player hugely.

Watch it again and think of what happens to the Irish rugby player that goes down like that after that contact.

The only way you could really claim it wasn't a dive is to say he caught him square on the ball of the ankle and it really hurt.

That might explain the collapse of his unaffected leg and the screamy expression that came on his face.

In fairness, the Mick parody was funny at first but it's getting a bit tired now.

But don't let that stop you.

gosplan

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

In fairness, the Mick parody was funny at first but it's getting a bit tired now.

But don't let that stop you.

Mick?

gosplan

niallo27 wrote: »

Maybe you answered already but do you think it was a penalty though. I do agree strikers do go to ground easily but they have to because you wont get a free otherwise.

I think technically it wasn't but the way the game is reffed, it was.

The fault is with officiating though.

It's complicated tbf. Even Delaney is confused


"I can honestly say I didn't make contact with benteke today and IF there was slight contact I didn't impede him and certainly didn't feel there was enough to award a penalty in the 96th min"

Harry Palmr

https://www.change.org/p/football-assosiation-ban-christian-benteke-and-fine-liverpool-fc-6-points

6 points at a minimum...


Only fair tbh

NukaCola

Harry Palmr wrote: »

https://www.change.org/p/football-assosiation-ban-christian-benteke-and-fine-liverpool-fc-6-points

Some of the comments there are quite funny......especially this one

There was no contact which made my penalty even more sweet. Thanks for the 3 points, ****ers!

Christian Benteke, Liverpool, United Kingdom