[Albion] Penalty or not so much?

[Littlemo]

So you're saying that it shouldn't count because headers are harder to get out of. Which means that when there's a clash of legs, we need to judge whether or not the defender could have got out of it? No, that's bloody stupid. Sometimes a defender is just unlucky when they catch an opponent and there's no way they could pull out of it, but it's a pen because they've caught them. This is the same.

No I think it shouldn’t count because it’s basically a 50/50 where both folk touched the ball and I don’t think all contact should be penalised. It’s still a contact sport and generally for headers two players are competing and clashes of heads happen often, often nothing is given for those as it’s seen as one of those things.

 

[Krafty]

In the modern day, it is a penalty. Saliba clashes his head with Pedro's which causes the player to go down. It is a dangerous move and therefore a foul and a penalty in my opinion. I don't think many can complain about that.

 

[jcdenton08]

Absolute clear penalty.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

In the modern day, it is a penalty. Saliba clashes his head with Pedro's which causes the player to go down. It is a dangerous move and therefore a foul and a penalty in my opinion. I don't think many can complain about that.

Quite. If Saliba had kicked his foot no one would be complaining. Planting your head on an opponent is no different

 

[Eeyore]

Whatever the rights and wrongs. I still maintain the above poll would be reversed had we been on the receiving end.

Whatever the letter of the law, then that's what it is. But I do feel uncomfortable seeing it given from a neutral perspective.

The inconsistency is the biggest issue. How was the Newcastle one not given ?

 

[Han Solo]

I'm with Arteta in the sense that I've actually not seen this before - two players trying to head a ball, one being faster and the other heading his head and it all resulting in a penalty...

But it seems a penalty to me technically speaking. Our player was faster and more agile and got to the ball quicker and the defender - of course accidently since there's zero purpose - heads into theirs. If the ball is on the ground, the equivalent is both going for the ball and our boy being faster so they kick his leg instead of the ball.... penalty.

Technically speaking it is correct, bit like the one last week was probably technically correct.

But thats of course not to say we weren't lucky. Usually this is never given, however right or wrong it is. If the ref didn't blow, the VAR probably wouldn't even have been arsed checking it.

 

[PTC Gull]

Jonathan Pearce got it spot when he said anywhere else on the field, it’s a foul and a free kick, therefore as it happened in the area it’s a pen.

Lee Dixon said exactly the same on my commentary.

 

[American Seagle]

I'm with Arteta in the sense that I've actually not seen this before

But thats of course not to say we weren't lucky. Usually this is never given, however right or wrong it is.

Which is it? How can you say you have not seen it before and then claim it is never given usually!?

 

[Man of Harveys]

As is so often the case, it’s actually really simple: anywhere else on the pitch and that’s a free kick to us (even from that bald front bottom). So a foul in the penalty area means that you get a penalty, even if some Spanish lunatic who’s been driven mad by all the Just For Men hair dye seeping into his brain doesn’t like it.

 

[Han Solo]

Which is it? How can you say you have not seen it before and then claim it is never given usually!?

I've seen head clashes like that before and I've seen penalties before but not mixed

 

[nicko31]

Arsenal spitting the dummy for a second time this season against us, what’s no to like

Arsenal tried to bore their way to victory, miles off title pace

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Whatever the rights and wrongs. I still maintain the above poll would be reversed had we been on the receiving end.

Whatever the letter of the law, then that's what it is. But I do feel uncomfortable seeing it given from a neutral perspective.

The inconsistency is the biggest issue. How was the Newcastle one not given ?

I think you could say that with almost all penalties. The Villa one, for example.

 

[Burlinggap]

For me never a pen unless the law states that a player is not allowed to go for a 50/50 header.

the villa pen was never a penal in a million years but this is completely irrelevant as to whether it was a penalty yesterday and quoting it makes you look a bit daft.

what I struggle with this season is when defending corners it seems to go unpunished if you are holding a player even with both hands wrapped round him, this is clear and deliberate and largely ignored

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

Pen for me.

Can understand it being unusual but he took Pedro out with his head. Pen.

Maybe if Arsenal had tried being less shit instead of time wasting from the 20th minute they’d have won the game.

 

[blockhseagull]

The highlight before was Pervis winning a clear header against rice but was rightly penalised for a foul because he got ball but fouled him. In fact Pervis actively headed the ball rather than the ball hitting his head. Both were fouls.

Exactly …. If the Perv header was a foul then so was the pen incident.

Fans complain they want constancy from referees and they got it yesterday, just doesn’t suit the Arsenal fans agenda because it was against them.

 

[fleet]

Was a pen - he was also pulled twice before this head contact. Strange one as the ref gave us absolutely nothing all night except this decision!

 

[nickbrighton]

i was surprised the Match of the day pundits all thought that headbutting in the penalty area was perfectly legal, and just a coming together. If that were the criteria 50% or more of penalties would not be given. They frequently use the -he felt contact and was entitled to go down- or he got the ball but took the player out with the follow through argument when a defender slightly mistimes a tackle-to justify penalties given for bugger all, yet a full on headbutt is fine because its arsenal?

 

[PascalGroß Tips]

i was surprised the Match of the day pundits all thought that headbutting in the penalty area was perfectly legal, and just a coming together. If that were the criteria 50% or more of penalties would not be given. They frequently use the -he felt contact and was entitled to go down- or he got the ball but took the player out with the follow through argument when a defender slightly mistimes a tackle-to justify penalties given for bugger all, yet a full on headbutt is fine because its arsenal?

It shows they really haven’t got a clue. And other fans will take what they say as gospel - when it suits their agenda. It’s one of the reasons I hardly ever what what pundits have to say on MotD etc. I fast forward past them. They had next to nothing in my opinion.

 

[jordanseagull]

For me never a pen unless the law states that a player is not allowed to go for a 50/50 header.

the villa pen was never a penal in a million years but this is completely irrelevant as to whether it was a penalty yesterday and quoting it makes you look a bit daft.

what I struggle with this season is when defending corners it seems to go unpunished if you are holding a player even with both hands wrapped round him, this is clear and deliberate and largely ignored

Of course you’re allowed to go for it, but if you’re second to it and headbutt the player…?

The equivalent challenge with the feet would be both players going for the ball, Pedro getting there first, the ball touching Saliba after Pedro’s kicked it, and Saliba taking Pedro’s leg out. Which would also be a penalty.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

MotD sticking with their punditry approach of ignoring the rules of the game, and focussing on what they would like the rules of the game to be.