Calderon DIVED.

[Biscuit]

I'm sure the 'keepers leg did touch Calderon, who maybe went down a little easily as the ball seemed to be getting away from him. However he did have CMS square and unmarked so maybe after the 'keeper had committed himself he should have played it across. Easy to say with hindsight I guess.

The BBC commentary is great. ''Certain penalty.. is there going to be a red here?''

 

[Biscuit]

With the greatest of respect, shouldn't the thread title be "Calderon Dove"? Is it dived or dove? That's the real issue here. For the love of Binney, let us not permit our grammatical standards to slip lest we become a laughing stock of the Footie Message Board World.

The traditional past-tense form of dive is dived. Although dove is common in speech, it's probably safer to stick with dived in writing.

verb conjugation is :

to dive I dive; you dive; he, she, it dives; we dive; you dive; they dive I dived/dove; you dived/dove; he, she, it dived/dove; we dived/dove; you dived/dove; they dived/dove dived/dove (Ex: They have dived too deep.)

Here.

 

[sten_super]

No he doesn't. He stretches for the ball with his right foot, avoids the onrushing keeper, and his left boot is caught whilst he is in the air. All I would say is it needs to be seen on a big TV screen, not a computer.
He didn't dive, it was a pen, and I'm not disappointed with anyone.

I'm leaving it now, and as mentioned before this incident is definitely an argument against video technology being brought in!

Similarly this will be my last post on the subject as we're clearly not going to alter each other's positions!

As far as I can see any touch the keeper makes on him is minute, he manages to plant his left foot after the contact and then goes over (having just watched it for the 25th or so time). In my view the contact is not enough to physically knock him over/off balance in the manner he subsequently falls.

Clearly! How the hell do you know, by the way?

Just because he's our player doesn't mean we have to defend him to the hilt regardless. In my view he dived.

As a final point, I'd just ask - if that happened down the other end, if it has been Sessignon that'd been 'fouled' by Ankergren, what would your reaction have been on seeing the replay? I'd have been absolutely fuming if the referee had given such a soft penalty.

 

[TKC]

I've wasted far to much of my time watching replays of "that dive/pen". There was contact. It should have been a pen.

 

[Acker79]

You can still dive even if there is contact.

Try telling that to FIFA (or uefa) who advise referees that if there is any contact they are not to caution a player for diving.

(according to graham poll, Graham Poll: Javier Hernandez is not a cheat | Mail Online)

The rules state it has to be a careless, reckless or excessive trip or kick to be a penalty. None of these boxes were ticked in my opinion...so it's not a penalty.

So, if you carefully trip someone (and deny them a goal scoring opportunity) it's ok?


For me, there's clearly a trip. So, either it was deliberate in which case it's a penalty, or the way and the speed at which he came out meant he didn't have the time or control to avoid tripping Calderon, so it was careless, and on top of that it denied a clear goal scoring opportunity, so was a penalty.

 

[Acker79]

i will never agree with the argument that contact equals penalty, thats rubbish, a player is allowed to touch another player with his foot, how else is he able to tackle him

Erm... by using his foot to make contact with the ball?

 

[Acker79]

As a final point, I'd just ask - if that happened down the other end, if it has been Sessignon that'd been 'fouled' by Ankergren, what would your reaction have been on seeing the replay? I'd have been absolutely fuming if the referee had given such a soft penalty.

If it had happen at the other end on the day I'd say 'yep, clear pen'. On seeing replay I'd say 'yep, clear pen, even if he does go down a little easy'.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

As far as I can see any touch the keeper makes on him is minute, he manages to plant his left foot after the contact and then goes over. In my view the contact is not enough to physically knock him over/off balance in the manner he subsequently falls.
.

Thing is, when you're running at full pelt, just how hard does someone need to clip your foot, for you to lose your balance?

 

[Hotchilidog]

Thing is, when you're running at full pelt, just how hard does someone need to clip your foot, for you to lose your balance?

Not very hard at all. Given the speed at which Calderon was moving any contact would have been likely to bring him down. The keeper was nowhere near the ball and there was contact with Calde, so it's a pen for me. You could argue that it was a soft one, but I did not think it a dive and a booking was harsh.

 

[Man of Harveys]

I've wasted far to much of my time watching replays of "that dive/pen". There was contact. It should have been a pen.

This. To me it looked a certain pen from every angle on Seagulls Player anyway. As well as the contact, just watch their keeper's reaction; he looked a very relieved man indeed.

 

[Beach Hut]

Having seen it last night it was a penalty in my view

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

I think I've finally seen the contact you are all referring too. As I see it calderon left his foot in, so he made contact with the keeper, and therefore Calderon fouled the keeper. Free kick to them, yellow card for Calderon, right decision made. Next time Inigo, jump over the challenge and bury the ball and perhaps people would have got out of Bennett's Field a little quicker

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

So, if you carefully trip someone (and deny them a goal scoring opportunity) it's ok?

No. Caution wise this will come under

Cautions for unsporting behaviour
• commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a
promising attack

And I do not think the keeper was doing this either. Contact was made but I really cannot see where the claim for the penalty comes from.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Not very hard at all. Given the speed at which Calderon was moving any contact would have been likely to bring him down.

Fair enough, but there has to be some give in a robust contact sport. Otherwise any moving player in the penalty box literally becomes untouchable.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Just to add my two-penneth. It looked a penalty to me. There looked to have been contact - and if you are running full pelt and expecting contact of course you anticipate it. As MoH said - their keeper looked relieved.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

if you are running full pelt and expecting contact of course you anticipate it.

What do you mean by anticipate it? Can you expand this?

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Next time Inigo, jump over the challenge and bury the ball and perhaps people would have got out of Bennett's Field a little quicker

If you are running at full pelt you can jump, but you also have to land, rebalance, then shoot. Why give them the advantage ? The keeper should control his challenge. If you are at full pelt and the keeper looks to be about to scythe you down - it is self-protection to anticipate it.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

What do you mean by anticipate it? Can you expand this?

If you are at full speed and about to get clattered from the front you do not run on regardless. If you get clattered when your foot is planted in the turf - that could be a serious injury.

"Bad luck Inigo - your career is over, but at least you did the right thing".

 

[xenophon]

Jesus! SEVEN pages of this? It WASN'T a penalty, the ref didn't give it, if he had given it it would have been a penalty

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

If you are running at full pelt you can jump, but you also have to land, rebalance, then shoot. Why give them the advantage ? The keeper should control his challenge. If you are at full pelt and the keeper looks to be about to scythe you down - it is self-protection to anticipate it.

But this comes down to the careless/reckless point. A keeper is entitled to come out and defend a ball as long as it is not careless/reckless etc. Contact is allowed, but it has to be within certain parameters. If the keeper looked as though he was about to scythe the player down carelessly/recklessly etc then it's a clear pen. In my mind this is not what happened. I did not see a careless/reckless challenge and therefore I would not be able to give a penalty.