[Albion] Was it a penalty?

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Genuinely astonished that this isn’t absolutely unanimous. It’s a stonewall penalty.

The ‘but he played the ball’ brigade clearly don’t know the rules.

NSC would be in absolute uproar if we weren’t given a penalty for that.

It's you who doesn't know the rules.

In instances where there's no suspicion of violent conduct then getting to the ball first absolutely is the determining factor in whether an offence has been committed.

What you're getting confused with is instances where someone uses excessive force or endangers an opponent. Then it doesn't matter if they've got the ball first. But there's no suggestion of that here

 

[Justice]

Watch the Wolves highlights they have been shafted again by VAR/REF the ref was sent to the monitor to make his own judgement on an offside call bizarre.

Anyway Wolves concede a penalty the commentators clearly say the player wasn’t judged to have got ANY of the ball so VAR gives the pen.

 

[jessiejames]

I don’t think it’s ever changed has it? That has always been a penalty. If ‘football has gone forever’ then I guess you’ll never be watching it again?

Grow up FFS. It’s a clear penalty and we got battered 3-0 anyway.

Yes i will still be watching as i paid for my ST for next season. The poll results dont go along with what you say as a
Clear penalty.

 

[Justice]

Thing I don’t get is the Solly March one at Villa few years ago he got off as he touched ball. The rules changed? They confuse me.

That was the right call, firstly the ref today couldn’t wait to point to the spot and secondly VAR weren’t interested it was Arsenal against a mid table side.

 

[Sheebo]

That was the right call, firstly the ref today couldn’t wait to point to the spot and secondly VAR weren’t interested it was Arsenal against a mid table side.

So if the rules are the same as that, if you touch the ball, as long as it’s not dangerous, it’s not a foul

 

[A1X]

Does it matter?

Arsenal could have subbed me on for Rayes, at halftime, and they still would have won 0-3.

I dunno, your distribution might have been better and they could have scored more

 

[dazzer6666]

Course it bloody was

 

[Stat Brother]

I dunno, your distribution might have been better and they could have scored more

I am prepared to.conceed had I started in goal for Arsenal the game might have ended 1-3.

 

[Acker79]

Is making contact definitely a get out of jail card?

Not in law. There is nothing in the law about contact with the ball with regard to fouls, nor contact with the ball first nor how much contact is needed. But it is the explanation given when the ref doesn't give the foul (not just by pundits trying to explain it, but you will sometimes see refs gesture toward the ball, or make a sphere shape with their hands to indicated he 'got the ball'. I try to defend refs or explain their decisions as best I can, but this approach of 'some times it matters, sometimes it doesn't' really annoys me.

 

[Commander]

So where in the rules does it say it dont matter about making contact with the ball.

Let’s hear your understanding of the rule.

You don’t actually have one, do you? You’re just basing it on what you have heard and what you assume.

 

[Commander]

Im not talking about the result. The title said was it a penalty. If youmake contact with the ball first that a fair tackle.

According to whom? You?

 

[tedebear]

According to whom? You?

To be fair, we are just in and even the sky sports team were saying if VAR had gotten involved, the fact he got the ball first may have saved him….Many other similar situations have been found to be not penalties… When does a tackle end would be my question?

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

It’s a penalty. Silly clumsy tackle from the wrong side with a dangled leg. Gets a touch on the ball initially, but stops Jesus getting the second ball.

Pedro has won almost identical penalties for us this season.

However, the rest of the officiating in the first half was suspect as hell. Offsides missed, simple free kicks to us missed. Very, very poor.

Spot on.

I called pen immediately, however when you slow it down Lamptey’s touch was stronger than I first thought….

Not enough ultimately to warrant it being overturned though.

 

[Sheebo]

The official site and other outlets making a thing of it and Lamptey saying he thought he got some of the ball - nobody really knows the interpretation of the rules do they it’s very odd.

 

[Blues Guitarist]

Spot on.

I called pen immediately, however when you slow it down Lamptey’s touch was stronger than I first thought….

Not enough ultimately to warrant it being overturned though.

Why does the strength of Lamptey's touch matter? He either got the ball or he didn't.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Why does the strength of Lamptey's touch matter? He either got the ball or he didn't.

Because, rightly or wrongly, it’s the follow through as well these days.

If he’d got an even stronger touch, arguably there would have been less follow through.

 

[Justice]

Because, rightly or wrongly, it’s the follow through as well these days.

Only if it’s deemed dangerous. Is that deemed a foul outside of the box or a fairly won ball?

 

[Blues Guitarist]

Because, rightly or wrongly, it’s the follow through as well these days.

The follow through wasn't excessive in force or studs up. However, in the case of the studs planted in Mac Allister's chest it was - but no penalty. I don't understand.

 

[Eeyore]

Yes, it was a decision I can't complain about. His connection to the ball was tenuous and he clearly plays the man

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Only if it’s deemed dangerous. Is that deemed a foul outside of the box or a fairly won ball?

A foul because it was…. Some ball, more man…