What really get's my goat is how often do we hear Commentators / Co-Commentators continually discussing weather a touch on a opponent was enough for him go down or not ? implying that the law is that you only get a free kick / penalty if you go down ! to be fair if a player has connected with another player weather he goes down or not is ilrelevent, the law is, was the touch on the opponent careless or reckless which i would imagine in 99% of cases it is !

Edited March 7, 201610 yr by alfieconn

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

yep was no intent to touch the player if he did at all very harsh penalty

The mods should make this a regular feature - "Ref was right or wrong"

Yes, you could get the thread sponsored by Top Charoen.

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

it was a 100%, nailed on, as stonewall a penalty as you're ever going to see.

and the expression "player x was looking for it" is pure gibberish. benteke got tripped and went over. end of story. if by "looking for it" you mean "was in the penalty area when he was fouled" then fair enough. but i don't think you do.

Man city fans should be excluded from commenting; it was Frannie Lee that got it all started in the early 70's.

"that got it all started". That's a bold statement that deserves facts to prove "it was Frannie Lee that got it all started"...Lee One Pen.

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

it was a 100%, nailed on, as stonewall a penalty as you're ever going to see.

and the expression "player x was looking for it" is pure gibberish. benteke got tripped and went over. end of story. if by "looking for it" you mean "was in the penalty area when he was fouled" then fair enough. but i don't think you do.

The fact that the boys in the studio (Givens and Hutchinson) didn't agree and people on here don't agree makes nonsense of your "it was a 100%, nailed on, as stonewall a penalty as you're ever going to see".

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

Had a challenge similar to yesterday gone in favour of your team, you would gladly accept the penalty.

Over a season, decisions go for you and against you.

Like it or not, the officials make the final decision, and once that decision is made there ain't much you can do about it, except moan.

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

It's irrelevant if Benteke was looking for it.

The law is :

Did the player kick/trip or attempt to kick/trip the other player in a manner that was careless, reckless or using excessive force:

Now i would have said that Delaney was careless.

The mods should make this a regular feature - "Ref was right or wrong"

That's the best idea you've ever had BB

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

it was a 100%, nailed on, as stonewall a penalty as you're ever going to see.

and the expression "player x was looking for it" is pure gibberish. benteke got tripped and went over. end of story. if by "looking for it" you mean "was in the penalty area when he was fouled" then fair enough. but i don't think you do.

The fact that the boys in the studio (Givens and Hutchinson) didn't agree and people on here don't agree makes nonsense of your "it was a 100%, nailed on, as stonewall a penalty as you're ever going to see".

i don't know who givens and hutchinson are, but they're wrong. it was a foul. in the penalty area. therefore it's a penalty. what time in the game it happened, how much contact there was, both just totally irrelevant. it was a foul. therefore it was a penalty. anyone saying it wasn't is simply incorrect.

here's the video footage where you can clearly see the palace idiot trip benteke:

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

It's irrelevant if Benteke was looking for it.

The law is :

Did the player kick/trip or attempt to kick/trip the other player in a manner that was careless, reckless or using excessive force:

Now i would have said that Delaney was careless.

You are right, it's irrelevant if Benteke was looking for it; I added that as I thought he was.

Law:

Penalty awarded if...

"player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

kicks or attempts to kick an opponent

trips or attempts to trip an opponent

jumps at an opponent

charges an opponent

strikes or attempts to strike an opponent

pushes an opponent

tackles an opponent..."

I didn't think Delaney did any of those, he clearly pulled out of the challenge.

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

It's irrelevant if Benteke was looking for it.

The law is :

Did the player kick/trip or attempt to kick/trip the other player in a manner that was careless, reckless or using excessive force:

Now i would have said that Delaney was careless.

You are right, it's irrelevant if Benteke was looking for it; I added that as I thought he was.

Law:

Penalty awarded if...

"player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

kicks or attempts to kick an opponent

trips or attempts to trip an opponent

jumps at an opponent

charges an opponent

strikes or attempts to strike an opponent

pushes an opponent

tackles an opponent..."

I didn't think Delaney did any of those, he clearly pulled out of the challenge.

So from this video do you still say that he didn't trip him and that he clearly pulled out ?

Edited March 7, 201610 yr by alfieconn

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

Had a challenge similar to yesterday gone in favour of your team, you would gladly accept the penalty.

Over a season, decisions go for you and against you.

Like it or not, the officials make the final decision, and once that decision is made there ain't much you can do about it, except moan.

If City had gained all 3 points with 10 men and scoring that dubious late penalty of course I would take the points happily. But that's not the point here is it! Is about yet another dubious referee decision having such a huge effect on the outcome of the game. This was one of those that in real time i thought was never a penalty, in slow motion I can see the argument for awarding it even though I don't think it was (so even with video refs, that one is a tough one for an official to decide upon).

Was that a penalty for Liverpool yesterday in your opinion? I thought it harsh on Palace and wouldn't have give it - Benteke was looking for it.

it was a 100%, nailed on, as stonewall a penalty as you're ever going to see.

and the expression "player x was looking for it" is pure gibberish. benteke got tripped and went over. end of story. if by "looking for it" you mean "was in the penalty area when he was fouled" then fair enough. but i don't think you do.

The fact that the boys in the studio (Givens and Hutchinson) didn't agree and people on here don't agree makes nonsense of your "it was a 100%, nailed on, as stonewall a penalty as you're ever going to see".

i don't know who givens and hutchinson are, but they're wrong. it was a foul. in the penalty area. therefore it's a penalty. what time in the game it happened, how much contact there was, both just totally irrelevant. it was a foul. therefore it was a penalty. anyone saying it wasn't is simply incorrect.

here's the video footage where you can clearly see the palace idiot trip benteke:

Apologies, Shay John James Given and Donald "Don" Hutchison and they both couldn't be wrong as Given argued it was a penalty and your Hutchison argued it wasn't a penalty.

Saw the footage repeatedly last night in normal speed and slowmotion.

he pulls away from a challenge and the player and is on his knees when and if any contact is made, are you suggesting he deliberately attempted to tackle benteke with his right knee, think you are Stevie G not Stevie H.when asked Benteke said he thought the player may have touched him errrrr doesnt sound like a stonewall penalty to me.

the "laws" in soccer are never observed anyway.

I would have the guys play with their hands tied behind their back.

Apologies, Shay John James Given and Donald "Don" Hutchison and they both couldn't be wrong as Given argued it was a penalty and your Hutchison argued it wasn't a penalty.

Saw the footage repeatedly last night in normal speed and slowmotion.

it was a penalty. it was a foul. there's absolutely no debate to be had about it. you watch the clip above, you see delaney's knee clip benteke's foot and he goes over. it was actually a great spot by the linesman. there's no discussion to be had, it was definitely a foul and two lads being paid to generate debate on the telly doesn't change that.

he pulls away from a challenge and the player and is on his knees when and if any contact is made, are you suggesting he deliberately attempted to tackle benteke with his right knee, think you are Stevie G not Stevie H.when asked Benteke said he thought the player may have touched him errrrr doesnt sound like a stonewall penalty to me.

it doesn't matter 'how' he tried to tackle him, all that matters is it was a foul. didn't get the ball, made contact with the man, penalty. credit the linesman and the ref for getting a tough call right.

why is the debate always about benteke here by the way? or the ref? why not the clown of a palace defender who lunged in in his own area in the last minute of a match? if he'd stayed on his feet then palace are a point better off today.

StevieH you made your point it was a penalty, got it. Others saw it and don't think so. That's one of the beauties of football: opinions.

StevieH you made your point it was a penalty, got it. Others saw it and don't think so. That's one of the beauties of football: opinions.

So for catching him with his knee do you think Delaney was careless ?

StevieH you made your point it was a penalty, got it. Others saw it and don't think so. That's one of the beauties of football: opinions.

BB, it was a foul. a foul isn't an opinion, it's a fact. it's something that actually happened, not someone's personal take on whether or not something might have happened. anyone saying that wasn't a penalty is simply wishing it wasn't or being deliberately obtuse for some reason and ignoring the fact that the palace player tripped benteke.

Edited March 7, 201610 yr by StevieH

I didn't think there was a foul. That's my opinion. You thought there was. That's your opinion.

Alfie, If there was contact, it was minimal without any intent, recklessness, malice etc. If every time there is contact between defender and forward, and the forward goes down, are you saying that's a penalty? No it's not.

Edited March 7, 201610 yr by Bredbury Blue

Alfie, If there was contact, it was minimal without any intent, recklessness, malice etc. If every time there is contact between defender and forward, and the forward goes down, are you saying that's a penalty? No it's not.

First you said "he clearly pulled out of the challenge" now you are saying "If there was contact it was minimal" if you couldn't see the contact then you've clearly got something wrong with your eyes.

Strange i ask you if it was carelessness by Delaney for catching Benteke with his knee ? and you reply it was minimal without any intent, recklessness, malice etc.

Whats going down got to do with it ? read my inital post as thats exactly what i wasn't saying.

Edited March 7, 201610 yr by alfieconn

Silly foul. As if Benteke is capable of doing anything productive from that part of the pitch.

I didn't think there was a foul. That's my opinion. You thought there was. That's your opinion.

no, your opinion is simply wrong. it was a foul. the referee and linesman got it right. credit to them.

We would not be having this debate if it was Ashley Young, would be called a dive 100%, Benteke was waiting for contact to go down he took the easy option rather than stay on his feet and go on and score, look at old clips of Besty riding tackles to stay on his feet and score and not cheat, football has lost that to many cheating fairies and that includes Young too.