Media Thread 2017/18

[SilverFox2]

I accept a number of pundits, including MOTD said it was a penalty. So why, 2 days later are all the media outlets saying Silva Escaped. The question I asked was now the decision has been made is there any other headline than that ?

Perhaps it justifies their skewed view of the whole episode.
To infer we have been let off what should not have been a penalty obviously lacks awareness of the rule itself.

A foul was committed which most would agree with, a penalty was given.
For some reason they consider Bernards reaction to being fouled more important than the foul itself. The rule book says otherwise.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I don't think it was lacking awareness. I think it's deliberately relying on people not reading that carefully or noticing the revisionism.

As PGAO said, it's writing for their benighted flock.

It's not to inform them.

 

[Palace glad all over]

A foul was committed which most would agree with, a penalty was given.
For some reason they consider Bernards reaction to being fouled more important than the foul itself. The rule book says otherwise.[/QUOTE]


Yeah i think thats the point. but the players are stuck between a rock and a hard place - if you don't go down after a foul you dont win the penalty....

And its time to debate ref challenges on pen decisions like this.. because either way its a foul - so the game will have to stop by the new rule interpretation - its a foul and penalty or its a simulation foul. it can not be both - even if the player over acts after a penalty.

 

[Rolee]

A foul was committed which most would agree with, a penalty was given.
For some reason they consider Bernards reaction to being fouled more important than the foul itself. The rule book says otherwise.

Yeah i think thats the point. but the players are stuck between a rock and a hard place - if you don't go down after a foul you dont win the penalty....

And its time to debate ref challenges on pen decisions like this.. because either way its a foul - so the game will have to stop by the new rule interpretation - its a foul and penalty or its a simulation foul. it can not be both - even if the player over acts after a penalty.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately it's not that black and white. The ref may miss a trip, interpreting it as just a coming together or one opponent out muscling the other. In these type of instances play will not stop.

I'd welcome VAR but its not foolproof.

 

[squirtyflower]

(MOTD)

Phil neville said (yes Phil Neville)

was it a penalty , yes
was there contact , yes
was it theatrical , yes

He also said if he was involved at city and that situation happened he would drill it into the players to win the penalty as there was clear contact.

all the panel also agreed that it was a penalty

Immediately after the game Phil Chuckle said it wasn't a penalty and that Silva dived, on the news on 5Live.
By the time of airing motd he had changed his mind, so he's hardly an authoritative figure to be quoting.

 

[old blue]

I am a bit puzzled about the furore, manufactured by the usual suspects. I saw Bruno the right back of Brighton apparently deliberately elbowing an opponent in the face. I say apparently because I have not seen or heard anything about it.

 

[Palace glad all over]

I am a bit puzzled about the furore, manufactured by the usual suspects. I saw Bruno the right back of Brighton apparently deliberately elbowing an opponent in the face. I say apparently because I have not seen or heard anything about it.

post of the day ;)

 

[Chris in London]

(MOTD)

Phil neville said (yes Phil Neville)

was it a penalty , yes
was there contact , yes
was it theatrical , yes

He also said if he was involved at city and that situation happened he would drill it into the players to win the penalty as there was clear contact.

all the panel also agreed that it was a penalty

All of which sort of begs the question why so many media outlets had gone with the narrative that Silva has 'escaped' punishment. The clip you post suggests there was nothing to escape.

 

[SilverFox2]

I don't think it was lacking awareness. I think it's deliberately relying on people not reading that carefully or noticing the revisionism.

As PGAO said, it's writing for their benighted flock.

It's not to inform them.

I agree.
Last word as you say still leaves a sour taste typical I'm afraid of the media and its devious ways.

 

[Bilboblue]

Regardless of the reasons behind what was a fairly crude attempt by certain sections of the media to highlight the penalty incident, the result, despite their being no action taken, is still going to have a negative impact on both club and player. Jesus has now become the '2017/18 Sterling' and has been labelled by the media as a player who goes down too easily in order to win penalties. We've seen how that has affected decisions involving Raheem and I can't see it being any different now with Jesus.

Do you mean Bernardo Silva?