Bernardo penalty debate - no case to answer.

[Armaan]

Graham Poll just said it's a 'modern' penalty, his ankle was trapped and he did a modern exaggeration

He’s a fucking caveman ****. Hate the oldies that try and portray football as different a lot better in their own day, just fuck off Poll you boring ****. Running at fucking pace and his ankles trapped yet they moan at how he fell... fucking ****s.

 

[john lett]

He’s a fucking caveman ****. Hate the oldies that try and portray football as different a lot better in their own day, just fuck off Poll you boring ****. Running at fucking pace and his ankles trapped yet they moan at how he fell... fucking ****s.

Graham Poll not on your Christmas card list then lol

 

[I'm With Stupid]

No they don’t.
He doesn’t have to be touched.
A penalty can be given in the rules for attempting a foul.

See law 12

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

It turns out I am wrong, but not for the reason you say. In the FIFA rulebook, it says...

For this group of six, the referee must consider how the action was done:
- carelessly
- recklessly
- with excessive force

The group of six includes "trip or attempt to trip." But this is clearly aimed at a deliberate attempt to foul the player with no attempt to play the ball, hence why everything else on the list is basically violent conduct. The rules that follow refer to a genuine attempt to get the ball...

- Tackles an opponent to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the opponent before touching the ball.

With this group of four, the referee is only concerned with whether the action occurred, not how it was done.

 

[Rolee]

It turns out I am wrong, but not for the reason you say. In the FIFA rulebook, it says...



The group of six includes "trip or attempt to trip." But this is clearly aimed at a deliberate attempt to foul the player with no attempt to play the ball, hence why everything else on the list is basically violent conduct. The rules that follow refer to a genuine attempt to get the ball...

So 'contact' is mentioned in the rules then.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

So 'contact' is mentioned in the rules then.

Yep. I swear it wasn't last time I read them. Although maybe I missed it.

 

[Rolee]

Yep. I swear it wasn't last time I read them. Although maybe I missed it.

It's something I hear time and again mate, fans saying there's no mention of 'contact' in the rules.

Good on you for taking the time to look them up.

 

[kaz7]

Bernardo Silva will face no retrospective action from the FA after his penalty incident against Burnley. [@StuBrennanMEN
Get fucked jim white and the rag media

 

[Eds]

https://www.premierleague.com/news/444152

Simulation suspensions
Players who dive or feign injury could face a two-match suspension starting from this season.

Footage from the weekend's fixtures will be reviewed each Monday and any player found guilty of simulation will be banned.

The three-man panel will consist of one former match official, a former manager and an ex-player.

The Football Association will only be able to impose the ban if the panel's decision is a unanimous one.

If a player is found guilty of deceiving an official or admits to the charge, the yellow or red card given to the opposing player can be rescinded.

Funny how Calvert Lewin wasn't found guilty of deceiving an official

 

[CityInWashingtonState]

Bernardo Silva will face no retrospective action from the FA after his penalty incident against Burnley. [@StuBrennanMEN
Get fucked jim white and the rag media

This was clear cut.

B. Silva's ankle was trapped under Pope's body - the replay clearly shows this. 100% a penalty.

In the modern English game - lacking replay - it was absolutely Silva's responsibility to draw attention to the foul - did Silva exaggerate the foul - probably - nonetheless - it's still a clear cut foul.

 

[Bodicoteblue]

They have set the precedent now with this media witch-hunt of Bernie.
I cannot wait now for the next ‘controversial’ incident involving the raggy scum.