Disallowed penalty/goal for Newcastle last night...

[lizard]

Not seen it mentioned, but if it is please merge/delete whatever, and abuse me for my clear buffoonery.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/04/05/newcastle-uniteds-bizarre-disallowed-penalty-has-left-everyone/

To paraphrase:
Newcastle get awarded penalty.
Ritchie takes it and sticks it in.
Penalty disallowed for encroachment of Gayle.
Burton given a free-kick.

But he's apologised, so that makes everything all right.

Could you imagine if that happened here!

(Also, another nice touch is they still have Newcastle as second.)

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Ask Bens Grandad all about it.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

It really is amazing that nobody on here has mentioned it, until now.

 

[lizard]

Ask Bens Grandad all about it.

Was it conceded by their left back?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

To be fair, it's well hidden in the Huddersfield v Norwich thread.

https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showthread.php?350168-Uddersfield-v-Norwich&p=7874976#post7874976

 

[Triggaaar]

Could you imagine if that happened here!

Newcastle should have been given a penalty - they weren't. Happened here many times.

 

[T.G]

To be fair, it's well hidden in the Huddersfield v Norwich thread.

https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showthread.php?350168-Uddersfield-v-Norwich&p=7874976#post7874976

Also hidden in the other thread about the Newcastle penalty

 

[whitelion]

To be fair, it's well hidden in the Huddersfield v Norwich thread.

https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showthread.php?350168-Uddersfield-v-Norwich&p=7874976#post7874976

This one isn't though

https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showt...-Keith-Stroud-make-a-horlicks-of-Toon-penalty

 

[daveinprague]

Didn't this happen to us against Palarse at Stamford Bridge or was it disallowed because of palace players encroaching? ...which is much worse. I'm drunk/and stoned and can't remember

 

[The Fish]

Newcastle should have been given a penalty - they weren't. Happened here many times.

We were given a penalty, we scored the penalty, then that goal was incorrectly ruled out because the referee and his team didn't know the rules. The only way Burton should have got a free kick is if Ritchie missed and only Newcastle players encroached before the ball was kicked.

Not the same as not getting a penalty awarded.

 

[Triggaaar]

We were given a penalty, we scored the penalty, then that goal was incorrectly ruled out because the referee and his team didn't know the rules.

But your player was guilty of encroachment, right? So the goal was correctly ruled out.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

We were given a penalty, we scored the penalty, then that goal was incorrectly ruled out because the referee and his team didn't know the rules. The only way Burton should have got a free kick is if Ritchie missed and only Newcastle players encroached before the ball was kicked.

Not the same as not getting a penalty awarded.

But your player was guilty of encroachment, right? So the goal was correctly ruled out.

[MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION] is right. You're wrong. The goal was absolutely NOT 'incorrectly ruled out'. It was 100% correctly ruled out, for Gayle's very blatant encroachment. Stroud's only mistake was to NOT award you a re-take. So in essence, it is indeed just the same as being denied a clear penalty.

 

[Triggaaar]

@Triggaaaar is right. You're wrong.

Should be the NSC tag line. But with the correct spelling.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Should be the NSC tag line. But with the correct spelling.

If YOU can't spell it right, why should anyone else!?

 

[Triggaaar]

If YOU can't spell it right, why should anyone else!?

My spelling is correct, I checked with John Challis.

 

[One Love]

We were given a penalty

Yes, it was a gift as there was no foul.

End of story.

 

[GingerBeerMan]

[MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION] is right. You're wrong. The goal was absolutely NOT 'incorrectly ruled out'. It was 100% correctly ruled out, for Gayle's very blatant encroachment. Stroud's only mistake was to NOT award you a re-take. So in essence, it is indeed just the same as being denied a clear penalty.

A clear penalty is still subjective, the enforcement of this rule is not, therefore they're not the same occurance.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

A clear penalty is still subjective, the enforcement of this rule is not, therefore they're not the same occurance.

Indeed. But the outcome is the same, thus the phrase 'in essence'.

 

[The Fish]

[MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION]is right. You're wrong. The goal was absolutely NOT 'incorrectly ruled out'. It was 100% correctly ruled out, for Gayle's very blatant encroachment. Stroud's only mistake was to NOT award you a re-take. So in essence, it is indeed just the same as being denied a clear penalty.

No, it's fundamentally not. A "clear penalty" remains subjective. The penalty had already been awarded, clear or otherwise, and then the referee failed in his job because of a lack of knowledge a lack of basic competence. It would be like a referee awarding a goal after a team puts the ball in the back of the net directly from the throw-in.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

No, it's fundamentally not. A "clear penalty" remains subjective. The penalty had already been awarded, clear or otherwise, and then the referee failed in his job because of a lack of knowledge a lack of basic competence. It would be like a referee awarding a goal after a team puts the ball in the back of the net directly from the throw-in.

whatever.

At least you'll have something to blame if you lose the title on GD.