Mackenzie
Old Brightonian
So who was Martin telling to **** off after he scored? Was it the Brighton fans or the Derby fans behind the goal? Or both?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Penalty
- Thread starter flint
- Start date
Papa Lazarou
Living in a De Zerbi wonderland
Not sure - for both goals, and highlights showing other Derby goals, when they score, Derby players seem more upset than happy? Odd.
Sweeney Todd
New member
All I will say on the matter is that if Lee Mason had awarded us a penalty in such circumstances then I would be sending him a Christmas card.
surlyseagull
Well-known member
- Aug 23, 2008
- 848
With ram-tinted spectacles I'd say it was a clear penalty and bonkers defending when you're winning at the end of the game. Greer went to ground and slid in. I was annoyed that Johnny Russell nearly jumped out of the way when in that situation you just need to take the hit. Some on here have said Greer was simply trying to block the cross but if that's your aim as a defender you go parallel to the forward instead of sliding directly into him. Greer was attempting a tackle which was very poor judgement - actually a schoolboy error.
While penalties should not be cumulative things, I would say we should have had one when Dunk blocked Weimann's cross two-handed earlier in the second half. He's far enough away for that not to be accidental and be given most times. I expect that was something that was also weighing on Lee Mason's mind.
When Wilson went over in the first half it's unquestionably shoulder to shoulder. If it was shoulder into any other part of the anatomy (say into the back) then it would be a pen. The players are running together and the young fullback (Christie) is stronger and Wilson didn't complain. But I thought it was a little reckless from Christie simply because it was unnecesary and taking a risk in that you're giving the referee a decision to make.
We played poorly (way too pedestrian) and you stood out in your ability to move the ball quickly and attack at pace. We were lucky that we got the penalty at the end, not because it wasn't a pen but because it was a stupid piece of defending. But it would have been very harsh for us to lose the game.
It would be a lovely thing if there's nothing to play for on the final day of the season because both sides have already been promoted. If we've overtaken you at that point just imagine it could be your last game of the campaign before you actually play someone decent and put that amazing unbeaten record properly to the test!
By your own admission he was reckless and taking a risk ,now a shoulder to shoulder is not reckless and not taking a risk ......do you get where I am coming from old boy !
If it is excessive force then it is.
SIMMO SAYS
Well-known member
Ginger nob Adrian Durham aka 'Talksport' said it was NEVER A PEN.
He doesn't give us much normally due to CMS leaving his Posh to come to us.
To be honest he has been pretty complimentary for a few weeks.
He doesn't give us much normally due to CMS leaving his Posh to come to us.
To be honest he has been pretty complimentary for a few weeks.
Albumen
Don't wait for me!
I've never seen one given for that before. Trying to block the cross, the player crosses it, the defender takes out the crosser. No-one gives a shit as the ball hasn't been affected by the foul. It happens at least once a match, Mason had a right to give it but it's pathetic to think it actually warrants a penalty. I'm a defender, I'd never expect one given against me.
surlyseagull
Well-known member
- Aug 23, 2008
- 848
That was my point !
Correct. It makes no difference when the ball is played, or where the ball is. A foul is a foul regardless.
And having watched the incident on tv a few times now it's clear Greer slid into the chap and left a leg out. My only question is what the **** was the captain thinking?
Crewton Ram
New member
- Jan 10, 2013
- 75
I can understand the view that it was harsh to give it - I was surprised too - but it was technically correct to do so. The challenge took Russell out of the game - if the ball had come back his way, he couldn't have responded, he was still picking himself up after taking evasive action.
There's a simple rule in football today - if you go to ground in the penalty area, you'd better make sure you get the ball first, otherwise you ask for everything you get.
There's a simple rule in football today - if you go to ground in the penalty area, you'd better make sure you get the ball first, otherwise you ask for everything you get.
The contact looks minimal but the Derby player has, IMHO, clearly taken evasive action to escape the severity of Greer's lunge. It doesn't matter if there's contact or not.
You could of course argue that having clipped the ball back, Russell's evasive action deliberately took him towards Greer thus ensuring contact albeit off the pitch. (Thus not evasive) [emoji1]
The trouble is, there is no third umpire, replay - so whether we like it or not, it was given, as others have said we dodged a bullet when Dunk dived in vs MK.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
It happened right in front of me. Russell made sure he rolled over at least 3 times to make sure the ref saw it.
He may have rolled over a few times but it doesn't alter any of the facts of the actual challenge
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
The fact is there was no contact, but the ref was at a diagonal angle, so may have thought there was.
Prince Monolulu
Everything in Moderation
From the Ch 5 pics there appeared no contact, but the challenge gave the ref the option. Wish he had felt the same conviction regarding the Wilson shoulder assault.
sydney
tinky ****in winky
greer gave the opportunity for russell to milk a penalty....and that's exactly what he did.......done now....!! 3 points tonight please...
But there doesn't need to be contact if the ref feels evasive action from a dangerous tackle was taken.