Man C v Burnley penalty?

[Ciley Myrus]

Its a guess by the ref, you can tell by his body language and also by the way he is not alert enough to the handbags flare up which followed, did he even caution the gk? Had he been certain of his decision I think he would have ?
I don't even think he took any cautions for the melee, in his head am guessing (and only a guess of course) that he was not wanting to compound his own dodgy call by putting folk into the book aswell,
Am still going YC to City player and no pen, but, if someone else is giving the pen here, that's understandable too.
Bottom line is, that referee was not able to make a call, as he had remained static even though ball was fired into the danger area,, he neither got wide to give himself an angle, or close enough to sell his call. I think that's the lesson I take from this clip more than the actual decision itself.

 

[one]

Incident at 20 seconds
https://a.top4top.net/m_659437yq1.mp4

 

[es1]

Its a guess by the ref, you can tell by his body language and also by the way he is not alert enough to the handbags flare up which followed, did he even caution the gk? Had he been certain of his decision I think he would have ?
I don't even think he took any cautions for the melee, in his head am guessing (and only a guess of course) that he was not wanting to compound his own dodgy call by putting folk into the book aswell,
Am still going YC to City player and no pen, but, if someone else is giving the pen here, that's understandable too.
Bottom line is, that referee was not able to make a call, as he had remained static even though ball was fired into the danger area,, he neither got wide to give himself an angle, or close enough to sell his call. I think that's the lesson I take from this clip more than the actual decision itself.

He did book sane and one from Burnley

 

[Ciley Myrus]

Ok was not aware

 

[Matthew]

I'm not sure how you can make a case for this being looked at retrospectively. Does he exaggerate the contact? The answer is undoubtedly yes, but that doesn't mean that it's a dive. The keeper initiates the contact too, which has to be a consideration.

I don't ever like to see City players go down the way he did, but the reality is that you have to go down to get the penalty. Walker on Sterling last year anyone?

 

[Russell Jones]

did he even caution the gk? Had he been certain of his decision I think he would have ?

Caution the goalkeeper for what exactly?? In no way a reckless challenge, doesn't meet the DOGSO criteria and breaking up a promising attack no longer cautionable in area .....

 

[J79]

It's clearly the goalkeeper who charges into Silva, who is acting in a totally normal way (before the contact).

And seeing these images of his foot/ankle, you have to say it's a penalty, can't stay on his feet and continue play in a normal way. There could also be some kind of block of Silva's leg by the goalkeeper's arm there.

 

[Peter Grove]

Those stills prove nothing. They could argue the attacker ran into the keeper

They could, but that's why you can't judge it on the stills alone. Looking at the action at the time and then the replays, we can see that the forward was actually moving away from the keeper and it was the keeper who was moving towards the opponent and initiated the contact. I would say that if this is reviewed by the "simulation panel" (and according to what we know, there's a good chance it could be, as we were told they will review the footage from every game every week to try and spot any simulation that leads to a penalty or a sending off) it will go the same way as the Richarlison incident - not proven.

Yes, he makes it look theatrical but I think there's enough contact to say it was not just an out and out dive.

If he trapped his foot, how can he leap salmon like?

He can make an admittedly theatrical fall because the players were not frozen in place, they both continued to move and so the foot did not remain trapped forever.

Striker anticipated that and initiated the contact for me.

Not for me, as I said above the forward was moving away from the keeper (and towards the ball) when the keeper came in from behind him and initiated the contact.

 

[alexgr]

Agree with @Ciley Myrus about the ref's positioning - whatever you're giving here (and I think there's a case for both tbh although I'm alright with giving a penalty here), the fact is that the referee's decision just isn't credible and that's what it's all about at the end of the day. It's been a big criticism of Roger East and I thought it at several times during the game - his positioning was horrendous and seemed behind the pace.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

That's kind of what I was alluding too, pen, no pen, fine....but if we are looking to learn from other referees and try improve our own game, we need to see what works, what does not, and why, then put that into our game. That's what I take out of the clip.
Soon as ball is played towards to box (from right next to Roger East) he should have alarm bells ringing in head, ball is going to the pen area and something is going to happen. Either get wide, moving to left on the old fashioned diagonal, or if you feel you don't have the pace to get out there, move forward to edge of the 18....this referee did neither, he was central, some 20 yards from the incident and indeed had a player blocking his view. Cant even use reasoning of leaving it for AR as he is on other side. When you stop that clip, I expect a referee, esp at the very top level, to be in the picture. This referee was not. Why? Old too? Not fit enough? Not aware enough? Whatever the reason, its a good example to us all that to make the biggest calls, we need to at least give ourselves a chance by being somewhere in the correct position... staring down barrel of a gun from least 20 yards away with a player blocking your view is probably not the best or advised position to adopt here.
I think had this been Oliver, Dean, Atkinson, ok we can still debate the call, but, they would have been in a better place to make it. That's the difference between an ok ref and a good ref

 

[Sheffields Finest]

Maybe he's had training off this fella!!

 

[RustyRef]

That's kind of what I was alluding too, pen, no pen, fine....but if we are looking to learn from other referees and try improve our own game, we need to see what works, what does not, and why, then put that into our game. That's what I take out of the clip.
Soon as ball is played towards to box (from right next to Roger East) he should have alarm bells ringing in head, ball is going to the pen area and something is going to happen. Either get wide, moving to left on the old fashioned diagonal, or if you feel you don't have the pace to get out there, move forward to edge of the 18....this referee did neither, he was central, some 20 yards from the incident and indeed had a player blocking his view. Cant even use reasoning of leaving it for AR as he is on other side. When you stop that clip, I expect a referee, esp at the very top level, to be in the picture. This referee was not. Why? Old too? Not fit enough? Not aware enough? Whatever the reason, its a good example to us all that to make the biggest calls, we need to at least give ourselves a chance by being somewhere in the correct position... staring down barrel of a gun from least 20 yards away with a player blocking your view is probably not the best or advised position to adopt here.
I think had this been Oliver, Dean, Atkinson, ok we can still debate the call, but, they would have been in a better place to make it. That's the difference between an ok ref and a good ref

Don't disagree that his positioning was poor, and that he has probably guessed. Ultimately though he will be given a correct KMD as he got the decision correct, whether he guessed or not.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

Agree, my point being using this forum/site to educate and improve, we need to get ourselves into the correct position