Decisions leading to a Penalty

[Phil1]

Thought the rule came in at the start of the season. Plenty last week.
Especially the Michael Keane one, for Burnley. Refs just have to say they didn't see it,
as eye line was blocked. Don't think this will be as consistent as most media/pundits
seem to think. Mr Dean might see it as his personal crusade, but will others follow.

Fair point about last week. Just seems strange that our game was the only one really affected this week. I know for a fact that footballers aren't bright enough to learn their lessons in such a short space of time!

 

[01cravend]

I agree that the excessive tugging and holding etc needs to be clamped down on, but only when it's excessive, the Sterling penalty was ridiculous, Shawcross even said himself. Dean will give one for a defender being in an attackers way the next game he refs.

 

[malg]

It's going to be interesting. As Hughes said, they come out with new guidelines every season, and the refs stick by them at the start of the season, then it dies down. Interestingly the Stoke player held his hands up to his error and alluded to the refs coming to the club and talking about it.

It's like the new one about not swearing at refs. Everyone knows they will book certain players, but others will get away with it. Just like we all know that someone will do what Sterling did yesterday and get away with it. Smalling will pull someone's shirt at the Swamp and get away with it. Like the managers have all said, they want consistency, and I'm sure that when the first penalty is given against those cunts at Trafford, Mourinho will applaud the referee for his decision.

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

I agree that the excessive tugging and holding etc needs to be clamped down on, but only when it's excessive, the Sterling penalty was ridiculous, Shawcross even said himself. Dean will give one for a defender being in an attackers way the next game he refs.

Already has. That's all Sterling was. I know he touched him, but Shawcross pushed him a couple of times.
Real soft and as others have said, think he had to even it up to seem to be consistent.

 

[Tricky Dickys Right Foot Shot]

I agree that the excessive tugging and holding etc needs to be clamped down on, but only when it's excessive, the Sterling penalty was ridiculous, Shawcross even said himself. Dean will give one for a defender being in an attackers way the next game he refs.

The only thing Sterling has going against him was that he had his back to the ball, indicating he had no intention in playing the ball but to only take the player (be that player is 2x his size)

Liverpool will be thanking their stars they fucked Martin Skrtel off this season as he was the worse at pulling players shirts in the box.

 

[moenchengladbach blau]

A year or two the received wisdom from the pundits was that you cannot raise your hands to your opponents (or ye cannae raise them). If so Shawcross should have been penalised for pushing Sterling in the chest. Because of their respective sizes anything done by Sterling had to be ineffective.

But from what I can see there has been no pushing at all in any of the other matches around the country for two weeks. Hmmmmm. And no abuse of the ref either.

Or tio be more accurate, no matter what rules are brought in, the refs will always be selective in their application.

 

[backforCity]

Glad it's happening but I can't believe out of every game played this weekend only ours had players tussling at corners?
I might be wrong but I don't think any other penalties were awarded in any other games were they?
Unless only Mike Dean got the memo.

Brilliant. Exactly what I was thinking

 

[BlueTG]

There were loads in the Arsenal vs Leicester match that went unpunished. Consistency across the board is needed. Not to mention that how did Sterling's equate to a penalty!? It's a contact sport, he hardly gained an advantage and Shawcross pushed him as Sterlint did likewise.

It's just anoth bollocks campaign that referees will pursue in the first few weeks to suit whatever their agenda is, before forgetting about enforcing it, all to try and make it look like they are working on things in order to preserve the status quo of elite referees.

 

[Bill]

This rule has just given refs Carte blanch for giving rags a pen.

Let's see who benefits most over the season.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

The only thing Sterling has going against him was that he had his back to the ball, indicating he had no intention in playing the ball but to only take the player (be that player is 2x his size)

I think this is exactly the point. Holding has always been in the laws as a direct freekick. They've amended 'impeding an opponent' into two sections "impeding an opponent with contact" for a direct freekick, and "without contact" for an indirect freekick.

Sterling had his back to the ball and went to block Shawcross' run. It's difficult to argue that he didn't impede his first run with contact, and as you say, had no intent of playing the ball.

However, the initial contact made no difference, so unless there was more on the blind side to the being-the-goalline camera, this looks like Dean evening up after missing Kolarov/Allen. There'll be masses not given that are worse.

I think the Otamendi one was given because he got to the ball but was being held down (one hand on an arm, one on the shirt hem), with no intent to play the ball.