Southampton Penalty

[Tealeaf]

I did wonder on first replay if it was because the Southampton player had the ball between both legs, and that it was this that had caused him to go over.

Equally I can see a good argument that it was Moss was asked to review the red card, but then changed his mind entirely.

More concerning was the fact the he looked off the pace yet again, struggling to keep up and these “corrections” seem to be mounting up too.

 

[RobOda]

I watched it when it popped up online, and I thought it wasn't a penalty.

If I saw that situation live, I think I would have enough doubt to not give it, depending on the angle I'm seeing it at ofc.

 

[RustyRef]

imo not the case
the bigger better teams have better players, they are fouled more ( by inferior opponents, either on purpose or by accident)
they are in the opponents half and pen area more, thus more attacking free kicks/pens
they are stronger, fitter, more skillful, and, granted, a degree of, cleverer.

Agree, that has always been my view. When a big team plays a smaller one there is a lot more play in the latter's penalty area than there is the former's. That means there will be more challenges and therefore probability just means they will get more penalties.

 

[GraemeS]

Penalty and a YC is the correct call for me. Walker is going for the ball, but the opponent is in possession and gets there first.

 

[bloovee]

imo not the case
the bigger better teams have better players, they are fouled more ( by inferior opponents, either on purpose or by accident)
they are in the opponents half and pen area more, thus more attacking free kicks/pens
they are stronger, fitter, more skillful, and, granted, a degree of, cleverer.

i have taken part in games with 60,000, 50,000 home fans, v smaller teams. Hand on heart I experienced nothing favourable to the bigger teams.
What you do see is the defensive goal kick/corner kick situation, which just happens to go to the home team, and the small team get aggrived.
no different to the defensive decision all of us with common sense give, in all our games.

What I can state is, unwritten advise that if you are giving say a pk to the smaller team, at the home teams place, make it 110%, not 100%.
same goes for giving out a red to the bigger team.

I'm confused by that. You disagree with "bigger teams getting the decisions" but end up saying you'd have to be 110% sure before giving a penalty to a "smaller team" playing away...

 

[PinnerPaul]

This is re-refereeing the game and made even more of a farce because of this year’s invention that the threshold for awarding a PK is higher than a normal offence.

That said I think no pen is the right call here. It’s a foul by the attacker for me on replay. Not enough arm before that for a pen. I can understand the on-field call so amazingly I agree with the VAR decision and process in this one.

I would still ditch VAR and live with the consequences tho!

Amen to the last line.

 

[bloovee]

From 100 yards away I thought it was a cert penalty but didn't understand the red card. Anyone can watch different angles on MotD on BBC i-player and freeze it but here's enough to see why it wasn't so clear cut.

City 0-0 Southampton: Brief highlights

Watch the best of the action from Manchester City’s goalless draw against Southampton in the Premier League.

www.mancity.com

(The commentator - City's own - says Atkinson believes Armstrong initiated the contact but I have no idea if that was the reason or just a guess.)

Live, I thought Walker was further away than he actually was and that Armstrong had control. Umpteen replays later, Walker takes a little step before putting his leg out while Armstrong has both feet off the ground to get to the ball. I suppose Mr Clattenburg might have called it a "coming together" and it's certainly not as clear cut as I first thought. Oddest was City fans booing (VAR) as it was reviewed... but we've had plenty of C&O penalties not given by VAR so nice to get one decision (or get away with one).

I thought (live and more so on replays) that Livramento should have a red for his studs onto Sterling's shin.

And it took so long for VAR to decide to uphold the disallowed offside "goal". I can only think - because PGMOL like to leave us guessing - that the only issue was whether Sterling put it in or Foden (who was obviously onside from his own header), and I suspect the AR and even VAR couldn't be sure.

 

[Tealeaf]

From 100 yards away I thought it was a cert penalty but didn't understand the red card.

On live view I presumed it was for charging in the back, which isn’t an attempt to play the ball, but as you say, any number of angles and any number of theories.

And it took so long for VAR to decide to uphold the disallowed offside "goal". I can only think - because PGMOL like to leave us guessing - that the only issue was whether Sterling put it in or Foden (who was obviously onside from his own header), and I suspect the AR and even VAR couldn't be sure

And again, I don’t disagree, although it did look like Sterling tried to nick Foden’s goal, which is in itself karmic.

 

[bloovee]

On live view I presumed it was for charging in the back, which isn’t an attempt to play the ball, but as you say, any number of angles and any number of theories.



And again, I don’t disagree, although it did look like Sterling tried to nick Foden’s goal, which is in itself karmic.

I can think of words other than karmic. One ends in .....ic.

 

[Peter Grove]

Walker gets his body across and Saints player comes through the back for me, he's never in possession there. No pen

I think it looks that way mainly because (as is often the case) the slow motion replay distorts things. The shortness of the clip that was used also gives a misleading impression. For me, if you watch the action from further back and at normal speed, it's clear that the Southampton player was ahead in the race for the ball and Walker, knowing he was never going to get there otherwise, has hooked his leg around the forward in a desperate (but failed) attempt to reach the ball.

The initial VAR guidelines actually pointed out that, "The VAR and referee should use slow motion replays only for ‘point of contact’ for physical offences and for handball" and for me the overturn was at least partly a result of the VAR showing the wrong speed of replay and from the wrong point in time.

As far as was concerned I thought this should have been a penalty (but only a yellow card due to the attempt to play the ball).