The9

Interesting, as I had this conversation on the weekend with a gay Saints fan and he basically used the same analogy about whether people would sing songs about curry and expect it not to be deemed racist. Did he feel uncomfortable about it ? He went in the Chapel instead of the Northam, so I would guess yes, a bit. Made me rethink the whole thing a bit anyway, it was all healthy debate and he was vaguely amused by some of our other mates singing "we can see you holding hands" at my mate and his wife on the way to the ground.

Just for the record, the "instep" IS the laces. Last sentence under "anatomy" here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot

That's not a bad refereeing decision though, nothing that happened in that incident was outside the laws of the game. It was only the moral issue, and Wenger offering to replay the game, that led to the rematch. The ref probably could have given a non-existent foul throw, but that would have been worse. I note that in similar incidents since (usually involving the club who is giving the ball back accidentally beating the opposition's goalkeeper) they tend to allow the opposition to jog up the pitch with the ball to score in return. I've seen it 2 or 3 times, I think either Exeter or Yeovil's keeper scored one unimpeded reply once.

Yeah, the only remote grounds for it being a penalty is that Fonte ends up sitting with his legs in the box, which has nothing to do with where the foul was committed. Even if Dunk had been fully stood in the box and Fonte outside, if the arm he was pulling him with was outside the area it still wouldn't be a pen. Lampard's non-goal at the World Cup v Germany, The one Roy Carroll clawed back from 2 yards over the line at Old Trafford v Spurs, Spain had that disallowed "ball which was claimed to be "out of play" didn't even touch, never mind cross, the goal-line" effort against South Korea in 2002, all contenders, along with that terrible decision in England's favour in the 1966 World Cup Final of course... The goal given in the Championship a couple of seasons ago (was it Reading v Watford ?) when the ball went out for what should have been a goal kick fully 5 yards from the goal and never went near going between the posts gets it for me though.

Not a grey area at all, he was clearly still fouling inside the box and when the player fell there was no advantage to give any more. The only grey area was the void in Pele's head for doing it.

That was before "interfering" was part of the interpretation of laws, if an attacker was level or past the last defender he was given offside even if he was curled up next to the corner flag with two broken legs. I seem to recall Danny Tiatto had one disallowed for Man City against Saints when he'd run about 40 yards with the ball and hammered it into the top corner too, except that one was AFTER the whole "interfering" thing and should have counted. Don't forget that Ruud Van Nistelrooy's "not interfering" goal against Saints literally led to the rewriting of the interpretation - it had already been changed by the IFAB (aka "International Board") in the summer but no-one in the media had even mentioned the "you're not offside unless you actually play the ball" change until after we'd conceded that goal - and suddenly the week after the likes of Allardyce were standing players on the edge of the 6 yard box for free-kicks and instructing them not to play the ball. That interpretation has been reworked at least once since as a result, but it took us conceding a goal that NO-ONE outside the IFAB and the top referees thought should have stood to bring it to the public's attention.

I have a suspicion a Facebook friend of mine has a different video of it, might see if I can find it... Nope, just checked, it's of the first pen.

From the other end it actually looked like Hammond was running away from the ball and towards the keeper to initiate contact !

Is this some kind of ongoing Muppet Show joke, this gets posted after every single match ?

The sound at 7 is the muffling of the audio, the whistle is 12/13 seconds-ish. You appear to be the only person who couldn't hear it. I had a discussion yesterday in which a mate said the ref hadn't blown the whistle and I wasn't expecting to hear one when I saw the clip, but there it is. I was at the other end and talking to the missus so didn't hear it at the time.

He also was facing the action at that point.

It is DEFINITELY his whistle, you can also see him move his right hand to his mouth just before it to put the whistle in his gob.

You can hear the whistle on here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGyfPbmCSwc&feature=youtube_gdata_player In fact you can also see him raise his right hand to his mouth immediately before the whistle before the first penalty in the clip as well.

You can hear it quite clearly. Try listening to it without looking at the screen.

There is quite clearly a whistle before the first attempt when Harper is barely looking.

Yeah, you're right, I'd usually have clarified that it is given as an advantage but couldn't be arsed once I'd started posting excerpts from the laws. Have now edited. So here it is... And of course as there wasn't an offence by a Saints player, THAT means that the goal should have stood, so Walton's wrong one way or another.

Nice timing : http://ridiculousfootball.blogspot.com/2011/11/statuesque-ted-bates.html

Someone should point out they were already 1-0 down and their spoiling, defensive game plan was already out of the window by then. If he'd said "we were in it until 47 minutes" I might have given him some credit. If you foul often enough in and around your own box, the ref's going to give some against you. Of course amusingly due to Brighton's general willingness to fall over (esp. Mackail-Smith), Saints actually conceded nearly twice as many fouls as Brighton despite having the ball 58% of the time.

He doesn't say it's not original, he says that "a chant has to stay original and surprising", meaning he expects it, and it's not a surprise to hear it. I would say the implication is that he wants it to be for special moments, because if you do it all the time it's not special. Even Lallana doesn't get his songs when he's playing 5 yard passes on the half way line (unless we're already in the middle of one). The other comments support that theory. Also, no footballer is going to say "I don't like it" unless the alternative is something other than silence.

Lucky for him we'd got fed up of it by the 80th minute, he was barely getting a mention when he got 5 touches in 15 seconds late on, I had assumed our players were just trying to see how many times they could give it to him in a short time to see if we'd "Steeeve" along to all of them. It had mostly died out by the end.

Nah, I saw it too, kicks Chaplow in Saints' own half then the ball goes down our right and he tries to boot someone near the edge of the box too.

Absolutely, but if he blows his whistle and the keeper charges up the pitch and hoofs the ball off the penalty spot before Lambert gets there it's still a retake because play isn't live until the penalty taker kicks the ball and the keeper has to be on his line for the kick to count. The whistle in this case is SUPPOSED to signal both players are ready - if Harper had been on the line "not ready" and the ref had ordered a retake having blown his whistle, he wouldn't have had a leg to stand on. There are, of course, numerous examples of keepers coming off their line, the striker scoring and retakes not being ordered, due to the advantage. Also Though the procedure does clearly state "After the players have taken positions in accordance with this Law, the referee signals for the penalty kick to be taken" which was Walton's mistake here.

You CAN clearly hear the ref blow his whistle for the one before the retake, but if the keeper isn't on his line it's a retake anyway.

You need an update on the laws, it hasn't had to rotate one circumference for about 15 years, you only have to move the ball now. Which Yakubu also didn't, of course. They changed that the same time as being able to score directly from the kick off. Blackburn's goal was worse because Pedersen DE FACTO broke the laws of the game and committed a foul that meant the goal shouldn't stand, our penalty was a foul, and it was only the judgement of where that foul occurred which was wrong. http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/lawsofthegame/index.html

Until we go 4 up, then they might give it a rest.