A&H

Melbourne vs Western United - pen or not?

Murri O

Well-Known Member
Interested in the thoughts as to why the shout for a pen wasn't given. Incident is at about the 39 second mark.


Just want to understand the rationale if there was one. FWIW there was a VAR review but the ref stuck with his call. Fair play to him for backing himself.
 
The Referee Store
Personally, I think this is a penalty. However, if I was trying to give a rationale for the non call, I'd be saying that the attacker 'drags' his back leg and then obviously exaggerates the fall.
 
Just want to understand the rationale if there was one. FWIW there was a VAR review but the ref stuck with his call. Fair play to him for backing himself.
Just to be clear:either the VAR was wrong to send it down, or the R was wrong to not give the PK, as both are applying exact the same standard. That said, I think it’s a PK. But is it a C&O error not to give a PK? That’s a harder question.
 
Hmm how about players have a right to their position on the field, the defender is essentially static and the attacker runs into him.

At least there’s an interpretation.

My only problem with that is the player that falls over actually gets to the ball first. I can see if white had gotten the ball first and then there was a collision then you might say well bad luck, blue ran into white, keep playing.

Tricky one.
 
I'm giving the penalty here. However, to play devils avocado....

Referees say stuff like "shoulder to shoulder" all the time - if I'm looking for a reason not to give this, I think you could make a case this is just normal footballing contact which the attacker has clearly then massively exaggerated. Arguably if he'd just fallen over rather than adding a double front flip it probably would have looked even more like a penalty.
 
I’d been inclined to say penalty but if I was the referee, the Tom Daley swan dive would be enough to put doubt in my mind about the contact. I’ve never seen a player get tripped and naturally fall Upwards
 
I confess the thought of not rewarding theatrics does cross my mind
However in that clip, I see a clear foul and would need to award a pk
I would be saying to the striker tho, no need for the act
 
The swan dive would 100% have me turning it down. Yes, there is contact but the attacker has massively exaggerated it.
 
I think the momentum in the run and the way the legs tangle causes the 'jump/spin'
No amount of momentum will cause that kind of reaction. If you are running and someone or something trips you your natural action is to protect your fall, not jump up in the air.
 
I'm giving the penalty here. However, to play devils avocado....

Referees say stuff like "shoulder to shoulder" all the time - if I'm looking for a reason not to give this, I think you could make a case this is just normal footballing contact which the attacker has clearly then massively exaggerated. Arguably if he'd just fallen over rather than adding a double front flip it probably would have looked even more like a penalty.
My first thought on watching was normal football contact, I'm not sure I'd be giving this in a game and I think I could sell it by saying its a collision and normal contact, and I'm not giving a penalty if I'm only 75% convinced an offence has occurred.
 
Back
Top