You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Everton (H) Post-Match Thread
- Thread starter Chi-town blues
- Start date
Just had another look at the Foden pen.
It's a penalty. Defender makes no contact with the ball and made a challenge. Phil does kick him, but that's only because the defenders leg is there. If you make that challenge you have to win the ball and he didn't do that.
It's a weird one, but that is a penalty for me.
It's a penalty. Defender makes no contact with the ball and made a challenge. Phil does kick him, but that's only because the defenders leg is there. If you make that challenge you have to win the ball and he didn't do that.
It's a weird one, but that is a penalty for me.
simon23
Well-Known Member
Not in my opinion it didn't. Their donkey up front should have had a red card.
thats the only one of the decisions I would question...think there was intent with what he did (but intent is always the difficult/virtually impossible bit to prove)
Eccles Blue
Well-Known Member
We managed for 131 years without VAR farce, let’s manage for 131 more!
blue is best
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 596
I can’t remember who they were playing but I recall the dippers getting a penalty for exactly that, Mane went to kick the ball, defender puts his foot in front Mane kicks said foot and goes down, penalty awarded, how unusual they get it and we don’t!Just had another look at the Foden pen.
It's a penalty. Defender makes no contact with the ball and made a challenge. Phil does kick him, but that's only because the defenders leg is there. If you make that challenge you have to win the ball and he didn't do that.
It's a weird one, but that is a penalty for me.
platty7
Well-Known Member
I can’t remember who they were playing but I recall the dippers getting a penalty for exactly that, Mane went to kick the ball, defender puts his foot in front Mane kicks said foot and goes down, penalty awarded, how unusual they get it and we don’t!
Against spurs it was
kinky's boots
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Dec 2008
- Messages
- 605
They were worried it was nothing at all... :/They must off wondered what was under the coat mate..
Bluekiwi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 3,718
- Location
- New Zealand (since 1974)
- Team supported
- Manchester City (from 1955) & Adelaide Crows (AFL)
They are in the clip on the OSAs MotD didn't show the penalty claim or the Calvert-Lewin foul, any chance of clips being posted?
balotellishaircut
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 6,065
- Team supported
- City
Your discounting they want the dippers to win the league, right from the beginning, that's why VAR was introduced.We managed for 131 years without VAR farce, let’s manage for 131 more!
Dirty Harry
Well-Known Member
Just had another look at the Foden pen.
It's a penalty. Defender makes no contact with the ball and made a challenge. Phil does kick him, but that's only because the defenders leg is there. If you make that challenge you have to win the ball and he didn't do that.
It's a weird one, but that is a penalty for me.
Just mentioned this on another thread, although I think the defender gets the slightest of touches on the ball, to me, it looks like he still impedes Foden from getting his shot away with the follow on, wouldn't like it given against us, but I still think it merits a penalty.