The worse Penalty Given

[Smalls]

I was gobsmacked when I saw the various replays of the Penalty given on Saturday, truely unreal the guy tries some strange overhead thing and loses his balance and finally falls backwards. How can a so called top official give that???

[Foxstone]

I was gobsmacked when I saw the various replays of the Penalty given on Saturday, truely unreal the guy tries some strange overhead thing and loses his balance and finally falls backwards. How can a so called top official give that???

 

 

They would'nt have.

 

However, an officious little git anxious to climb the greasy pole who referees in the 3rd tier would!

[John B]

It really is strange that in most cases Penalties given against Saints are always wrong and Penalties given for Saints are always right.

 

 

Plus loads of Penalties are missed for Saints but never for the opposition:confused:

[doddisalegend]

It really is strange that in most cases Penalties given against Saints are always wrong and Penalties given for Saints are always right.

 

 

Plus loads of Penalties are missed for Saints but never for the opposition:confused:

 

Normally I'd agree with you fans can be very partisan about these things. But I think the ref lost his way in this match. I was only listening on the radio but when the commentators spend more time talking about the ref than the match you know something is not right. Still nothing to be done Leeds next week win that and we will all forget about this one.

[John B]

But I think the ref lost his way in this match seems to be the case

[Under Weststand]

I genuinely feel that most of the officials at this level are truly woeful! I don't think that they are particularly biased just not very good. What has amazed me most are the Linesman/ref's assistant's who very rarely make their own decisions but wait for the ref to point which way for a throw etc. However I do think that the penalty on Saturday was a poor decision, the player turned into & fell over a static Seabourne who made no effort to move towards or to tackle him in anyway whatsoever. but that is football some go for you some go against. We should not be relying on the ref to help us out. if we'd have taken our chances 1st half we wouldn't be discussing this now.

[John B]

I genuinely feel that most of the officials at this level are truly woeful! I don't think that they are particularly biased just not very good. What has amazed me most are the Linesman/ref's assistant's who very rarely make their own decisions but wait for the ref to point which way for a throw etc. However I do think that the penalty on Saturday was a poor decision, the player turned into & fell over a static Seabourne who made no effort to move towards or to tackle him in anyway whatsoever. but that is football some go for you some go against. We should not be relying on the ref to help us out. if we'd have taken our chances 1st half we wouldn't be discussing this now.

 

Seems rather strange but some these Refs must in the top 100 in the country.

[saintjay77]

I dont like blaming the ref in any match but from what people have said it seems hard not to on this occasion.

 

OK it also seems we didnt do quite enough to get the win ourselves and it was a below par performance from our team but its times like these you need the officials to give correct decissions and if that had happened then the result may have been very different.

 

I dont know how policing the officials works especially in the lower leagues. Do they have someone watching the ref to evaluate him? If the camera catches a player doing something that the ref didnt there is usually something done about it later. What happens to the ref? And if anything does happen to him how does it effect us?

 

It seems that no matter how much the officials cokc things up no-body calls for things to be done as ultimatly the 3 points have been won or lost and they dont matter any more. A game has never been replayed or points been awarded in retrospec because of a wrong decission. So clubs have a moan and then move on.

 

IMO something needs to be done about it to improve the game at all levels. Cant see what can happen though.

[yorkiesaint]

I don't think it is quite so cut and dry. It looks to me like Seabourne deliberately plants his right leg there so that when he moves he will trip. It is quite a cynical move at best.

[saintjay77]

I don't think it is quite so cut and dry. It looks to me like Seabourne deliberately plants his right leg there so that when he moves he will trip. It is quite a cynical move at best.

 

Ive just watched it over and over again and it looks to me that he closed him down and tried to get him to go away from goal. He didnt get there and then decide to stick his leg out. It was all in the same movment.

 

I was always told to show the opo the way to go by facing the way you want them to go. I never quite understood it as a kid cause i thought the opo would just go the other way and I would have to turn round again. But looked like Seaborne was doing what I never got.

 

Fair enough he went over Seabornes leg but it wasnt a foul.

[saint_stevo]

much more worserer than many i have seen......

[Didcot Saint]

I dont like blaming the ref in any match but from what people have said it seems hard not to on this occasion.

 

OK it also seems we didnt do quite enough to get the win ourselves and it was a below par performance from our team but its times like these you need the officials to give correct decissions and if that had happened then the result may have been very different.

 

I dont know how policing the officials works especially in the lower leagues. Do they have someone watching the ref to evaluate him? If the camera catches a player doing something that the ref didnt there is usually something done about it later. What happens to the ref? And if anything does happen to him how does it effect us?

 

It seems that no matter how much the officials cokc things up no-body calls for things to be done as ultimatly the 3 points have been won or lost and they dont matter any more. A game has never been replayed or points been awarded in retrospec because of a wrong decission. So clubs have a moan and then move on.

 

IMO something needs to be done about it to improve the game at all levels. Cant see what can happen though.

 

Mate i was at the game and the Ref was SHOCKING. We should have had at least one penalty if not two, which at the time would have put us in front and probably changed the whole game. IMO the little f...wit should never referee a football match again, he was THAT bad.

[Kingsbridge Saint]

Nobody will ever get near Roger Milfords performance at home against Oldham in the League Cup way back in the late eighties. I still want to punch him now.

[The9]

I don't think it is quite so cut and dry. It looks to me like Seabourne deliberately plants his right leg there so that when he moves he will trip. It is quite a cynical move at best.

 

Seaborne stood still and deliberately didn't move precisely so he couldn't be accused of tripping him, and the bloke fell over backwards off his standing leg in an attempt to do an overhead kick.

 

Their bloke dinked it up in the air and then fell/dived over backwards, half trying to do an overhead and half just falling over because he was already off balance from the dink. The most important part is, (unlike Nick Halling who said on commentary the "ref was well-placed to give it" on BBC), we've already seen the photos from behind the goalline which show that the ref's view was obscured by Schneiderlin.

 

So what the ref saw was the ball going in the air, and a Tranmere player fall over in between two Saints shirts (one of which was 5 yards away but blocking his view). It was never a penalty.

 

He had an even worse view from behind of the backpass-cum-assault on Barnard which could have been a red card and/or indirect free-kick in the box, but he decided to wave play on for that one... he was appalling, mainly in their favour, all match long.

 

PS @ the OP, try "worst".

Edited 8 March, 2010 by The9

[Whitey Grandad]

I don't think it is quite so cut and dry. It looks to me like Seabourne deliberately plants his right leg there so that when he moves he will trip. It is quite a cynical move at best.

The question is 'was he tripped' or 'did he trip'? The first is a foul, the second isn't. I can't speak for the rest of the match but this was a very poor decision, and I speak as a member of the referees' club.

[yorkiesaint]

I think Seabourne left a foot in, which he had previously placed there somewhat mischieviously. I'm not saying it should necessarliy be a penaltly, but no footballer should go into a game and assume all decisions are going to be spot on. By leaving his foot in he increased the chance of giving away a penalty, whether it was a foul or not, which as we have seen is irrelevant.

[saintjay77]

Mate i was at the game and the Ref was SHOCKING. We should have had at least one penalty if not two, which at the time would have put us in front and probably changed the whole game. IMO the little f...wit should never referee a football match again, he was THAT bad.

 

I wasnt there and no highlights show enough of the game to show how bad he was.

 

The comments of those that were there are enough though and Pards was pretty damming in his after match interview. He even said the Ref was bad for both sides which suggests it wasnt sour grapes and the ref truely was bad.

 

Question still remains though,

 

What should happen with games that have been ruined/decided by the ref based on wrong/poor decissions?

 

If a player gets pulled up for something the camera caught him do but the ref didnt he can still get a red or yellow card which will in turn effect our later games by not having a player available.

 

If a ref does something wrong and a game is won based on that action then nothing the FA do to him will effect the losing team on the day.

 

What would it take to force FIFA into using TV footage during a game? Should a club take the leagues or the FA to court for damages? Say we miss out on the play offs by 1 point. That penalty decission could be argued cost us that point and it was the ref's poor/bad decissions that made it so we should be entitled to damages.

 

Im not trying to say that our season is based on that one moment but this kind of thing happens in at least 1 game every week. The season we dropped out of the prem, how many dodgy decissions cost us points that could have kept us up that year?

 

The current set up is not fair when so much rides on clubs futures. Its FIFA's duty to make the competitions fair and true yet because there is nothing set up to change the results then no-one see's worth in challenging it.

[saintjay77]

I think Seabourne left a foot in, which he had previously placed there somewhat mischieviously. I'm not saying it should necessarliy be a penaltly, but no footballer should go into a game and assume all decisions are going to be spot on. By leaving his foot in he increased the chance of giving away a penalty, whether it was a foul or not, which as we have seen is irrelevant.

 

http://www.skysports.com/football/match_video/0,26719,11065_3151228,00.html

 

50 seconds in.

 

He ran in and turned to his left. Opo went the other way and went over Seabornes leg.

 

Its not obstruction if you dont move so Seaborne had every right to be there and hold his position.

 

I do agree however that it was a 50/50 one and its pot luck if its given or not. Had the ref not missed blatent penaltys earlier in the match I doubt there would be as much debate on this one.

[yorkiesaint]

I agree, had the ref not given it noone would be talking about it.

[yorkiesaint]

http://www.skysports.com/football/match_video/0,26719,11065_3151228,00.html

 

50 seconds in.

 

He ran in and turned to his left. Opo went the other way and went over Seabornes leg.

 

Its not obstruction if you dont move so Seaborne had every right to be there and hold his position.

 

I do agree however that it was a 50/50 one and its pot luck if its given or not. Had the ref not missed blatent penaltys earlier in the match I doubt there would be as much debate on this one.

 

obstruction is an indirect freekick in any case.

[sfc4prem]

Looking at the highlights it does look like Seaborne pulls him backwards slightly, with his right leg just behind the Tranmere lad's, sort of like a judo manoeuvre.

 

It does seem to be one of those that can go either way, and due to the ref mucking up on several occasions previously, many Saints fans, me included, are truly annoyed by the standard of refereeing in this league.

[irishsaint83]

Mate i was at the game and the Ref was SHOCKING. We should have had at least one penalty if not two, which at the time would have put us in front and probably changed the whole game. IMO the little f...wit should never referee a football match again, he was THAT bad.

 

Was at the game also, Ref was a shocker - for both teams. Right from the off he was poor and the two linesmen were not much beter. Personally, I can live with no getting a legit penality, we are a far better team than Tranmere and should have picked up the 3 points anyway but we didn't.

[The9]

http://www.skysports.com/football/match_video/0,26719,11065_3151228,00.html

 

50 seconds in.

 

He ran in and turned to his left. Opo went the other way and went over Seabornes leg.

 

Its not obstruction if you dont move so Seaborne had every right to be there and hold his position.

 

I do agree however that it was a 50/50 one and its pot luck if its given or not. Had the ref not missed blatent penaltys earlier in the match I doubt there would be as much debate on this one.

 

28_F, it can be obstruction if you don't move, but obstruction (which it wasn't) is an indirect free-kick anyway.

[St Landrew]

[/b]

 

 

They would'nt have.

 

However, an officious little git anxious to climb the greasy pole who referees in the 3rd tier would!

 

Radio commentator Kris Temple mentioned that the match was the first League One game the referee had taken. His usual best was League Two. Whilst that shouldn't reflect on the ref's abilty, once again a questionable decision might be the difference between a club succeeding or not. The calls for technology to help referees are getting louder for the Premiership. It means just the same for Football League clubs. I really don't know why there is such a resistance. Get the cameras in, get the tests done, and let's get down to a football game, where we pretty much know 99-100% that the result of a game is the real one.

[Arizona]

Not a penalty, but not really a howler from the ref either. I've seen more ridiculous pens given. Opening day of the season at Leicester a few years back and one of their strikers, Dickov I think basically jumped on Michael Svensson and they got a penalty. Same game Phillips scored that belter on his debut.

[saintjay77]

28_F, it can be obstruction if you don't move, but obstruction (which it wasn't) is an indirect free-kick anyway.

 

Ah fair enough. I was trying to say it wasnt obstruction but was also trying to say it wasnt a foul either.

 

It was a 50/50 and if the ref had given us ours earlier everyone would be saying that he just evened it up. Which is not right in its self but seems to be more accepted.

 

If TV replay was in use it would only have helped if the ref had asked for it. He may have done for that Pen but he waved play on for our pen shouts so we could have been done anyway.

 

Somehow the FA or who ever need to make the officials more accountable whilst giving them the tools to make the correct decissions.

 

Fans of high level Rugby dont complain too often about shocking ref's and generally leave thinking there team should have done better, were 2nd best or deserved the result.

[Sour Mash]

Radio commentator Kris Temple mentioned that the match was the first League One game the referee had taken. His usual best was League Two. Whilst that shouldn't reflect on the ref's abilty, once again a questionable decision might be the difference between a club succeeding or not. The calls for technology to help referees are getting louder for the Premiership. It means just the same for Football League clubs. I really don't know why there is such a resistance. Get the cameras in, get the tests done, and let's get down to a football game, where we pretty much know 99-100% that the result of a game is the real one.

 

Video technology for football will never work. The ref on saturday was very poor, but that had more to do with him being a jumped up, clueless, little midget and no amount of video technology would change that.

[The9]

The calls for technology to help referees are getting louder for the Premiership. It means just the same for Football League clubs. I really don't know why there is such a resistance. Get the cameras in, get the tests done, and let's get down to a football game, where we pretty much know 99-100% that the result of a game is the real one.

 

Personally I'm against the use of technology as it takes the game away from grass-roots and means the game we play in parks isn't the same as the one played in the World Cup Final, as well as removing the simplicity of football, which is part of its attraction.

 

But equally, I'm not sure how technology would improve things when we've got lots of Saints fans saying Fonte dived, lots saying it's a penalty, and some people still thinking Seaborne had anything to do with theirs being given. There's still differences of opinion after repeated viewings.

 

Also, do you review the free kick that probably wasn't that was given prior to their first goal ? Do you retrospectively send off their centre back for fouling Barnard when he was running through prior to the backpass that also wasn't given ? Do you do that at the time ? That game would still be going on!

 

The ref was crap, no doubt, but rating him as poor using a decent performance system that rewards accurate decision making rather than things like "looking smart" and "being decisive" (whether decisively wrong or not) is the key, so a useless idiot like him only gets to ruin parks matches, not artificially grafting more stopping and starting onto it - nor more bloody officials who don't have the balls to give decent decisions when standing next to the goals, either, for that matter.

 

I note now that Sour Mash has captured my argument in about 2 sentences, so fair play to him for that.

Edited 8 March, 2010 by The9

[OldNick]

Nobody will ever get near Roger Milfords performance at home against Oldham in the League Cup way back in the late eighties. I still want to punch him now.

+1, him and Adrian heath cost our club a fortune. I dislike them almost to hate.Sad nearly 25 years later

[Sheff Saint]

+1, him and Adrian heath cost our club a fortune. I dislike them almost to hate.Sad nearly 25 years later

 

I think Roger Milfords dead now?

 

Also, I'm not sure obstruction is an in-direct free kick any more. Think they scrapped that a few years ago.

 

Never ever a pen, sorry. It's just black and white not a pen. If you were to be a bit harsh you could even do the Tranmere player for raising his boot in attempting the bicycle kick.

 

I'd like to see if Saints Player shows the foul on Barnard, or the back pass that followed soon after.

 

I'd also like to see the penalty shout on Fonte. I did think he dived but i reckon there was as much defenders leg there as the Tranmere kick.

[saintjay77]

Video technology for football will never work. The ref on saturday was very poor, but that had more to do with him being a jumped up, clueless, little midget and no amount of video technology would change that.

 

Thing is, there is no come back that helps anyone when a jumped up clueless llittle midget ruins a game. By which point 3 points have been won or lost.

 

Having the assistance of video technology leaves no excuse for a ref to cokc it up and greater penaltys can be imposed on him to stop him cokcing future games up.

 

If the technology is there and he fails to use it to confirm some key decissions then he is just leaving himself more open to a demotion down the leagues.

 

I bet Rugby fans said it would never work in there sport too.

 

I dont want it to take over Football but think it can be a massive help to the officials and it should cut out poor decissions making or wrecking a clubs campaign.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

If that was given at the other end I would have laughed!!

[The9]

I think Roger Milfords dead now?

 

Also, I'm not sure obstruction is an in-direct free kick any more. Think they scrapped that a few years ago.

Never ever a pen, sorry. It's just black and white not a pen. If you were to be a bit harsh you could even do the Tranmere player for raising his boot in attempting the bicycle kick.

 

I'd like to see if Saints Player shows the foul on Barnard, or the back pass that followed soon after.

 

I'd also like to see the penalty shout on Fonte. I did think he dived but i reckon there was as much defenders leg there as the Tranmere kick.

 

Obstruction is an indirect free-kick. What they did a few years ago IIRC was advise that indirect free-kicks shouldn't be given for offences inside the box, which of course makes very little sense. I'll see if I can find the exact wording...

 

There was a lot more defender's leg in the Fonte incident (he at least moved it towards the player rather than just standing there), and it was also less of a dive than two of Moore's plummets in the box prior to that.

[Whitey Grandad]

Obstruction is an indirect free-kick. What they did a few years ago IIRC was advise that indirect free-kicks shouldn't be given for offences inside the box, which of course makes very little sense. I'll see if I can find the exact wording...

 

There was a lot more defender's leg in the Fonte incident (he at least moved it towards the player rather than just standing there), and it was also less of a dive than two of Moore's plummets in the box prior to that.

Obstruction is rarely given, if ever. There are technical offences which warrant an indirect free-kick, such as a 'backpass'.

[MDG]

Nobody will ever get near Roger Milfords performance at home against Oldham in the League Cup way back in the late eighties. I still want to punch him now.

Was that the game when Andy Ritchie scored in injury time...? Cold Tuesday night if I remember.

[The9]

I think Roger Milfords dead now?

 

I just Googled to check and there's nothing to suggest he is, though weirdly he's the only FA Cup Final ref since 1986 who doesn't have his own Wiki page. I assume that's due to the endless war of words between Spurs and Forest fans that would have gone on on his page...

[The9]

Obstruction is rarely given, if ever. There are technical offences which warrant an indirect free-kick, such as a 'backpass'.

 

That doesn't mean it's not in the laws.

 

You might have added "offside" to the list, something someone around me obviously wasn't aware of on Saturday when advising Kelvin to "shoooooooooooooooooooooooot" from a subsequent free-kick. Though if your point was about conceding indirect free-kicks in your own box, then obviously offside isn't going to be one of them.

[benjii]

Sounds like a pelanty (© Chris Waddle) that Mike Riley gave against us at the Walkers Bowl on the opening day of Strachan's last season.

 

Sir Les (I think) jumped in the air and landed awkwardly. They got a pelanty.

[The9]

Law 12 of the Laws of Football states: 'An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player, in the opinion of the referee: impedes the progress of an opponent.

 

It's not "obstruction" any more apparently, it's "impeding". Pretty sure Seaborne wasn't doing that either.

 

6th August 2002 : http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/sport/article-346995-don-puts-indirect-free-kicks-into-touch.do

 

Don has issued strict reminders to his select group of 24 professional officials after finding that a subtle change in the laws was not being implemented by many referees. 'There's no longer any offence called obstruction,' said Don, who discovered that some officials were even ignorant of FIFA's shift in emphasis.

 

Obstruction has been replaced by 'impeding' and where contact occurs under that category, referees have been instructed to make all free- kicks direct - with penalties awarded for such infringements in the area.

 

FIFA official Steve Bennett, who will referee Beckham's Manchester United in West Bromwich Albion's opening-day visit to Old Trafford, said: 'The law was not highlighted and a lot of people were unaware of it. Referees have been reminded obstruction is no longer in the rulebook.

 

'Virtually the only time now that you will see an indirect free-kick is when a player obstructs an opponent without making contact.'

 

Amazing how something like that sticks, but the statutory red card for sliding tackles and tackles from behind disappeared some time between 1994 when it was first a directive and 2000 when some fcker took out my knee ligaments two footed and knee-high as I was shielding the ball... :mad:

 

PS It came in at the same time as "daylight", which is no longer in use.

[The9]

Oh, and Mark Clattenburg says:

 

http://www.refworld.com/ask/mark-clattenburg/8/1

 

If there was an obstruction in the penalty box would you give a penalty or a indirect free-kick?

 

If there is obstruction in the penalty area then it would be a Indirect Free Kick but if there was contact in the process of a player trying to obstruct another player then it would be a penalty kick.

[Sour Mash]

Thing is, there is no come back that helps anyone when a jumped up clueless llittle midget ruins a game. By which point 3 points have been won or lost.

 

Having the assistance of video technology leaves no excuse for a ref to cokc it up and greater penaltys can be imposed on him to stop him cokcing future games up.

 

If the technology is there and he fails to use it to confirm some key decissions then he is just leaving himself more open to a demotion down the leagues.

 

I bet Rugby fans said it would never work in there sport too.

 

I dont want it to take over Football but think it can be a massive help to the officials and it should cut out poor decissions making or wrecking a clubs campaign.

 

Rugby is a completely different sport to football, there is very little point comparing the two. There is an obvious scenario that no-one has been able to give me a clear answer to. At what point is the game stopped for a decison to be made? Next time the ball goes out of play? What if after a penalty shout, the defending team goes up the other end and scores and that is the next time the ball goes out of play? Imagine the goal might not count, every stands around for 4 or 5 mins while the penalty shout gets replayed enough times and from different angles for the decision being made? It would kill the game.

 

Or if you stopped play straight away and had a bounce ball once the decision had been made, again it would become a slow moving, scrappy farce. And who would decide which incidents were relayed to a video judgement?

 

Football thrives on it's pace, the way it can flow from one end to the other and back again. Video technology will not stop the controversy, but just slow down and kill a large part of what makes watching football entertaining.

[chrisobee]

much more worserer than many i have seen......

 

Even more worserer than most of your bets TBH !

[chrisobee]

Sounds like a pelanty (© Chris Waddle) that Mike Riley gave against us at the Walkers Bowl on the opening day of Strachan's last season.

 

Sir Les (I think) jumped in the air and landed awkwardly. They got a pelanty.

 

Which begs the question was THAT the worse pelanty ever

[St Marco]

That really was a bad decision by the ref. He didn't even try to move around Seaborne, he did like a flick and with the momentum went down. You would hardly ever get those outside the box let alone in it. Could you imagine if that happened to Man Utd vs Chelsea for the title or something, the ref would get a severe dressing down from the FA. But obviously nobody gives a **** what happens in the third division.

[Whitey Grandad]

That doesn't mean it's not in the laws.

 

You might have added "offside" to the list, something someone around me obviously wasn't aware of on Saturday when advising Kelvin to "shoooooooooooooooooooooooot" from a subsequent free-kick. Though if your point was about conceding indirect free-kicks in your own box, then obviously offside isn't going to be one of them.

I suppose the only other indirect free-kick offences in your own area must be dangerous play and anything which needs a yellow card, such as dissent or unsporting behaviour. Not many people know that you cannot score an own-goal straight from your own direct free-kick or corner kick, nor that you cannot be offside from a goal-kick.

[benjii]

you cannot score an own-goal straight from your own... corner kick

 

That would take some doing!

[up and away]

Which begs the question was THAT the worse pelanty ever

 

This one would more than likely go down as the best, other teams may view it otherwise.

 

Pires goes into the box, hooks his trailing leg behind his running leg and goes down in a heap with no Portsmouth player near him. Not a minutes hesitation, stonewall penalty from the Southampton born referee.

[Window Cleaner]

Certainly isn't, not say compared to some of the blatant diving and plunging that have obtained penalties with no contact at all.I don't like the look of where Seaborne's right elbow is and I suspect that the ref didn't either.Could be nothing in it but there's definite contact and that elbow up under the blokes chin is suspect. Probably just another knob ref though but a bloke in his first season as a League ref might get easily confused by that.

[Kenilworthy]

Worst ever penalty was at White Hart Lane in 87. We were on our way to a well earned draw when in the last minute Flowers made a great and very brave save at the feet of Paul Allen. The referee saw it as a penalty and Clive Allen won the game for Spurs 2-1.

[brmbrm]

No penalty. he fell over the defender: when going backwards