Jump to content

Should we have been given a Penalty?


Boab

Recommended Posts

Wilson hand ball in the second half?

My mate said that if he was a big Rangers fan then he would have been really claiming it in a big way as I wasn't convinced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a penalty, his hand was away from his body and directly impeded the path of the ball.

Doesn't matter that Miller should have buried the resultant chance ... it was definately a penalty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a penalty, his hand was away from his body and directly impeded the path of the ball.

Doesn't matter that Miller should have buried the resultant chance ... it was definately a penalty.

I agree. I was only pointing out that if he buried the chance we wouldn't be talking about it.

Definite penalty though!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It should have been a penalty, the ref technically played advantage, and if Miller had scored the goal then we would have been screaming if it was brought back for a penalty, whistle being blown and all that.

On the other hand though, when there has been an incident in other parts of the park sometimes a ref will see if there is an advantage to be played first, if not, he will then blow and call it back for the free kick, again it could be argued that technically because Miller didn't score the goal there was no advantage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Miler should have buried the follow-up

But was it a penalty? one of the clearest ones i have seen this season.

Regardless of "he couldn't get out the way" or any of that fucking pish, his hand was out from his body and he influenced the flight/direction of the ball in the box = penalty.

Remember Barca's disallowed goal at the end of the game with Inter? Hand ball given against Toure (?) before Bojan finished it off. That was given as a free kick and it was less of a hand ball than this was.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a clear penalty by todays refereeing standards.It was a more obvious penalty than the one Lyon got against Bordeaux in the CL. quarter final 1st leg.

Now if the Ref played the advantage rule as some suggest he did ( which is the correct decision ) and Miller had scored, then the goal would have stood.When Miller hit the post, then the correct decision would have been to award the penalty kick.

The problem in football is that there is no consistency at all these days with Referees and it's always explained as..."In the Referees opinion" which gets them out of jail when people get puzzled and angry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The way i see it the player jumped to block the cross. That's fine. However, his hands were not only out, but moved up after the ball was kicked. So this was 100% hand to ball. I'm not sure on the Refs position or where the linesman was.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can play advantage on a penalty? <cr>

Stone waller. How I can see it on a shitey projector screen, in a packed pub and after a few pints but the referee can't from 10 yards away is a mystery!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can play advantage on a penalty? <cr>

Stone waller. How I can see it on a shitey projector screen, in a packed pub and after a few pints but the referee can't from 10 yards away is a mystery!

Technically yes, because Miller still had a chance to score a goal, so you could say he was playing advantage, but as he didn't score and therefore no advantage he should have then awarded the penalty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...