Decisions leading to a Penalty

[Bbc spokesman]

I think Mike Dean gave the soft Sterling penalty to even up his mistake in the first half when Kalarov got clumsy with Joe Allen. Sterling gave him an excuse and he took it ...

 

[Tricky Dickys Right Foot Shot]

If Mike Dean did give that Sterling on Shawcross penalty to even up for not giving the Kolarov on Allen one then that's terrible officiating, because then that means he's made two mistakes in one game to try and counter balance his initial first shit decision (and it was a shocking decisions not to give Stoke the first penalty) with another equally shit decision.....


Referees should be forced to face the media like players and managers after every game and questioned on stuff like this, as I find it laughable that they demand respect yet continue to fail at their jobs making poor decisions throughout the 90 minutes.

If a player or manager made as many mistakes as a referee people would be demanding blood, well if referees enjoy the limelight so much then they should be put on the spot straight after a game and questioned on decisive and/or poor decisions made throughout the 90...

 

[babyape]

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

Let's see who benefits most over the season.

This was my immediate worry. Ref's already aren't being consistent with the rule, if they were, like has been mentioned, there would have been 20 penalties at the weekend.

I can just see this giving a ref the excuse to award the rags a soft penalty should they need it in the derby.

We need to be on it from the start...

 

[moomba]

Didnt think either of the penalties were good decisions. Otamendi was doing as much holding of Shawcross as the other way around.

I reckon we'll see a heap given where forwards grab shirts and try and pull defenders on top of them.

Sterling was not a foul.

Kolarov was pretty blatant though.

So 0 out of 3. Well done Mike.

 

[MadchesterCity]

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

Let's see who benefits most over the season.

Agreed this was my immediate concern

 

[BlueTG]

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.

Sterling's "first contact" was a slight, limp-wristed push, which is exactly what Shawcross gave him at the exact same time.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

I wouldn't be surprised if Dean has been 'spoken' to for those two pens. I've just watched the Foxes v The arse and Crapps has let some 'trips' go that make Dean's 'holding' look like a serving of candyfloss.

The top and bottom of the new directive is that few will apply it with such relish as Mike Dean did at weekend, and what will stick in fans' craws on the terraces is that the same ref will wave away an identical foul next week or the week after that he sanctioned the week before. The upshot will be that penalty awards will still be a raffle or lottery.

 

[fredmont]

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.

Dean's point was Sterling had no interest in the ball, just tried to block his man. I always wonder about this, Aguero always looking at his man and ignoring the ball. Makes no sense to me.
Chuckle 2 saying it's part of the game, it's a ruination of the game . The Celtic game against Juventus (?)worst of the lot. Howthe fxck did that have anything to do with football.

Keep giving penalties, they will soon learn. Even Shawcross apologised, he knew about the rule 'change'.

Dean drives me nuts, but on this occasion totally correct.

Best thing that's happened for a while in my opinion, this and carding the gobby gets.

 

[Phil1]

I was looking through Richard Keys tweets yesterday or the day before (not sure why, but there you go) and he reckoned that the referee assessor told Dean he got the Shawcross one correct but not the Sterling one?

Maybe @SWP's back can help?

 

[SWP's back]

I was looking through Richard Keys tweets yesterday or the day before (not sure why, but there you go) and he reckoned that the referee assessor told Dean he got the Shawcross one correct but not the Sterling one?

Maybe @SWP's back can help?

I'll ask him his source.