New penalty rules

[Woodleyclaret]

I know bizarre handball rules have been introduced but when did putting both hands on an opponent's back inside the box,shoving him over not become a penalty
Stonewall penalty for the foul on Wood and where was VAR ?turned off at the time ?

[taio]

I didn't think it was a penalty. Would have been soft anyway. If it was the other way round and given I wouldn't be happy.

[Grimsdale]

Law 14 states:
A penalty kick is awarded if a player commits a direct free kick offence inside their penalty area or off the field as part of play as outlined in Laws 12 and 13 as long as the opposing team is not Burnley.

[RalphCoatesComb]

Even Sean said it would have been soft but he pushed him in the back in the penalty area. Penalty should have been given.

[Barry_Chuckle]

Would have been a soft one if given.
What amazes me is comments from comentators and pundits, if that had been on Kane, Sterling etc the comments would have been "there was definitely contact, he had a right to go down" but when it's on a less fashionable teams player you get comments like "Not enough contact for me, he went down easily"
It makes me want to puke, I wish they'd be consistent with their assessments.

[Devils_Advocate]

Its football fans (understandably) who are not consistent whereas the different refs just give what they see at the time.

Remember when Tarks put his hands on the back of Ramsey? People went mad on here going on about it being a contact sport, Ramsey diving and that it never a pen in a million years

There was far les contact on Wood where both players were just stood so close together that the defenders hands were placed momentarily on Wood's back yet they will be some who were calling Ramsey a diving cheat now telling anyone who'll listen we were robbed of a penalty

To be fair the majority view on here seems sensibly that it wasnt a pen but for those who disagree ask yourself honestly what your view would have bee if that was Dunne on Danny Ings

[Bigvince]

I didn't think it was a penalty. Would have been soft anyway. If it was the other way round and given I wouldn't be happy.

I think it would have been soft also, but ask yourself would it have been given, had it been Salah, Vardy or Kane

[taio]

I think it would have been soft also, but ask yourself would it have been given, had it been Salah, Vardy or Kane

I don’t know. But certainly more likely, yes. However, I try to judge each case on its own merits. In this instance I don’t think it was a penalty.

[WazzaClaret]

I don't want that kind of challenge to be a penalty but if others get them for the same then So should we. Either give them all or give none of them. That's the issue, no consistency.

[MDWat]

Never a pen in a month of Sunday’s. You’d need some heavily claret tinted specs to genuinely believe that was a penalty. There was no push motion, he felt a hand on his back (contact sport remember...) and fell over. Pretty much the opposite of what Dyche says we do.

[Targetman]

Never a pen in a month of Sunday’s. You’d need some heavily claret tinted specs to genuinely believe that was a penalty. There was no push motion, he felt a hand on his back (contact sport remember...) and fell over. Pretty much the opposite of what Dyche says we do.

Just curious....what did you make of Leicester's 1st penalty today at Man City involving Vardy and Walker.
I thought it was quite similar in many ways.

[Aclaret]

New Penalty Rules ? Leicester score 3, yes 3 in one game !! Remind me, I can't remember our last penalty never mind 3 penalties ago. Don't think the new Penalty rule has reached Turf Moor just yet.

[MDWat]

Just curious....what did you make of Leicester's 1st penalty today at Man City involving Vardy and Walker.
I thought it was quite similar in many ways.

1st - pen (arm pulled Vardy, there was no push or pull on Wood)
2nd - pen
3rd - no pen (didn’t think there was a pull, and not enough to warrant a fall in the same way I didn’t think Wood’s warranted a fall)

Pens are hard, so subjective

[dsr]

1st - pen (arm pulled Vardy, there was no push or pull on Wood)
2nd - pen
3rd - no pen (didn’t think there was a pull, and not enough to warrant a fall in the same way I didn’t think Wood’s warranted a fall)

Pens are hard, so subjective

A lot of it is because refs make it hard for themselves. They have decided that the rule says a tiny push or pull can be a foul IF the attacker throws himself to the ground, and that an attacker who stays on his feet cannot have been fouled at all. They were too stupid to realise that this just encourages attackers to throw themselves to the ground so they have to make the decision more and more.

They need to say that an attacker who throws himself down will not get a foul no matter what. As it stands, the cheat prospers and the honest man does not.

[California Colner]

If that incident happened in midfield would the ref have given a foul
In my opinion he would have
There seems to be different rules depending where you are on the field

[Devils_Advocate]

If that incident happened in midfield would the ref have given a foul
In my opinion he would have
There seems to be different rules depending where you are on the field

It wouldnt have happened in midfield cos non of our players would have chucked themselves to the floor like Wood did if it was in the middle of the park and not in the penalty area

[dsr]

It wouldnt have happened in midfield cos non of our players would have chucked themselves to the floor like Wood did if it was in the middle of the park and not in the penalty area

Nail on head with the exact problem that football has. According to the laws of the game, it makes no difference at all whther the player throws himself on the floor or not. If I commit a foul, my opponent staying on his feet can't make it not a foul; if I don't commit a foul, the opponent throwing himself down can't make it into a foul.

Unfortunately referees are too stupid to know that.

[Jakubclaret]

Nail on head with the exact problem that football has. According to the laws of the game, it makes no difference at all whther the player throws himself on the floor or not. If I commit a foul, my opponent staying on his feet can't make it not a foul; if I don't commit a foul, the opponent throwing himself down can't make it into a foul.

Unfortunately referees are too stupid to know that.

Yes it’s true somebody hitting the deck will infer & somebody staying upright won’t, regarding the referees the referees are just becoming robots it’s not the referees fault the powers are being shifted away from the referees & referred to VAR to make the decisions, the referees are executing the decisions but in no true part deciding the decisions.

[superdimitri]

Never a pen in a month of Sunday’s. You’d need some heavily claret tinted specs to genuinely believe that was a penalty. There was no push motion, he felt a hand on his back (contact sport remember...) and fell over. Pretty much the opposite of what Dyche says we do.

That's one thing that is kind of stupid coming from Dyche. Luckily for us we have a squad of players who generally know the best time to go to ground.. Something we probably lacked in our first season in the Premier League with Dyche... But I don't (and I'm sure other teams fans don't either) buy the diving talk.

Don't get me wrong. I agree with Dyche when he says it has no place in the sport and I hate seeing it, but I also know we have so much against us already that we can't possibly be the only team trying not to cheat when everyone else gains around us by doing so.

Dyche is clearly just playing games to make it seem like we are the good guys, probably in attempt to gain decisions. However it's just embarrassing to hear him say none of our players do it and it doesn't ever amount to anything so I wish he'd just not mention it.

It should be a lot easier nowadays to spot the simulation and do something about it. VAR and slow motion replays easily show when something is as fake as Wood falling to the ground yet nothing is done about it to help the game.

There's even a rule that if the referee deems it to be a dive, he books the player in question. Never seems to actually happen.

What gets me is all these rule changes come in for penalties, handball, offside, & even how each half starts yet they still don't do anything to eradicate the diving.

The game would be so much better if they did take action and I'd expect us to follow suit, but until then we have to cheat just like the others do to compete as best we can and there's no doubt about it, if we were playing Leicester and it was Vardy who went down instead of a a Wood it would have at least gone to review and probably ended up being a penalty.

The state of consistency between decisions is appalling and we barely ever get the rub of the green. I think that's why people are frustrated not getting that decision rather than the actual dive itself. If they tightened up on it and players were getting suspended for repeat offences then it would increase the fairness and consistency of the decisions.

[MACCA]

I don't want that kind of challenge to be a penalty but if others get them for the same then So should we. Either give them all or give none of them. That's the issue, no consistency.

And if it would have been Wood on a Goalkeeper its sn instant foul.

Not a pen for me, but they certainly find ways to give them, or justify giving them depending on the player/team the decision is being made for.

[Gordaleman]

I mentioned this yesterday but no one seemed to pick up on it. It's an idea I saw on the BBC sports pages.

What happened to the indirect free kick in the penalty area? Surely, giving an indirect free kick for accidental handball in the area would be far fairer than a game changing penalty.

Personally, I don't think 'Accidental' hand ball should be a foul at all (And with VAR it's easy to make that judgement.) but I'd rather an indirect free kick was awarded than persist with the current situation.

[claretandy]

I see that the Premier League have told the referees to use more discretion, Lindleoff and Ward now won't be penalties, but Maupay and Dier will be (arm above shoulder height). Common sense at last.