The penalty shout

[Tricky Trevor]

Arm away from the body, on target, looked away but knew exactly what he was doing.
PENALTY.
It actually went from one arm onto the other but this was the pen.

BA7D45A9-D5EE-47FC-928B-7C637EF4FC8A.jpeg (1.94 MiB) Viewed 2310 times

[Devils_Advocate]

Id need to see another replay but it looked to me like it hit body first and then on to the arm. I think if it deflects from a defenders body onto their arm its not a penalty so if that was the case I think the ref got it correct

[Tricky Trevor]

Id need to see another replay but it looked to me like it hit body first and then on to the arm. I think if it deflects from a defenders body onto their arm its not a penalty so if that was the case I think the ref got it correct

No. It was arm, body, left hand(which you can just see). A man wouldn’t have turned his back, which is what threw his arm out(centrifugal force).

[Devils_Advocate]

No. It was arm, body, left hand(which you can just see). A man wouldn’t have turned his back, which is what threw his arm out(centrifugal force).

I disagree but like I said Id need to see a replay as nowhere near 100%. Your screenshot does nothing to answer my question as it is just one frame and doesnt show where the ball came from and where it was going.

You asked a question and I gave my answer like im sure others will do so no need to get in to a debate with me. If some posts a replay on here I will look at it and reassess my opinion and if it hasn't hit body first or even the hand next to his body first then I will change my view to it being a penalty.

For me though the ball has to hit that outstretched are first for it to be a penalty

[ClaretAndJew]

We want the penalty given for us but wouldn't want it given against us. Typical football fans really, knowing **** all.

[Tricky Trevor]

I disagree but like I said Id need to see a replay as nowhere near 100%. Your screenshot does nothing to answer my question as it is just one frame and doesnt show where the ball came from and where it was going.

You asked a question and I gave my answer like im sure others will do so no need to get in to a debate with me. If some posts a replay on here I will look at it and reassess my opinion and if it hasn't hit body first or even the hand next to his body first then I will change my view to it being a penalty.

For me though the ball has to hit that outstretched are first for it to be a penalty

Never looking to fall out with you DA. I was just telling you the order of events after watching it several times, as you say yourself you are not 100%.

[Tricky Trevor]

We want the penalty given for us but wouldn't want it given against us. Typical football fans really, knowing **** all.

I think it was one where VAR stuck with the onfield decision. If Attwell had given it VAR would have stuck with him also.

[Roosterbooster]

Original thought: penalty
Enough for VAR to overturn: No

Old school rules: no penalty
Current rules: debatable

I'm happy enough with how the officials handled it

[Cheshireclaret]

Nathan Redmond decided it wasn’t a penalty, so that was sufficient for Attwell.

[gawthorpe_view]

Slightly off topic but I don't want to start a new thread, what sparked the melee which resulted in 2 bookings in the 2nd half?

[daveisaclaret]

Slightly off topic but I don't want to start a new thread, what sparked the melee which resulted in 2 bookings in the 2nd half?

This has literally just come up on the replay on Sky Sports - Bednarek started it and Tarky was getting into it with him.

[Cheshireclaret]

Slightly off topic but I don't want to start a new thread, what sparked the melee which resulted in 2 bookings in the 2nd half?

Difficult to see from down the other end, but from the JMU it looked like Bednarek had one of a number of tantrums, this time over the fact one of our players (Tarky?) went down in the area with a head injury so Attwell stopped play whilst Southampton were attacking. He then went into proper toddler meltdown mode when the defender got back to his feet.

[gandhisflipflop]

I had a fiver on a 3-0 win so believe me I wanted that penalty, however that was not a penalty. He was turning away from the ball, not even looking at the ball and it was coming at him far too quick to even consider it being deliberate. I’m not sure where else he could have put his arms there.

[RMutt]

Difficult to see from down the other end, but from the JMU it looked like Bednarek had one of a number of tantrums, this time over the fact one of our players (Tarky?) went down in the area with a head injury so Attwell stopped play whilst Southampton were attacking. He then went into proper toddler meltdown mode when the defender got back to his feet.

I see that if the drop ball is in the area it always goes to the ‘keeper. Seems a little unfair if the attacking team has possession at the time………but never mind.

[daveisaclaret]

On replay it's a stonewall penalty - the arm is out from his silhouette and the ball makes contact with the arm before the body. With the new VAR-friendly rule, that's handball.

I don't think it should be, but that's neither here nor there.

[Tricky Trevor]

I see that if the drop ball is in the area it always goes to the ‘keeper. Seems a little unfair if the attacking team has possession at the time………but never mind.

That, to me, was exactly what was winding Bednarek up. We had already benefitted once and he could see what was coming. In both instances they were genuine head injuries so Atwell got both correct.

[davetheclaret]

We want the penalty given for us but wouldn't want it given against us. Typical football fans really, knowing **** all.

That's how i always look at these things you can't have it both ways, the problem is the inconsistency of the refs.

[quoonbeatz]

The handball was as blatant as they come. Arms were stretched out so it was a basically a save. Wasn't even close enough to say he couldn't get out of the way.

[Rowls]

Should've been given. There's scope for not giving penalties for "ball to hand" moments and some are more open to interpretation than others but on that sliding scale this should have been given.

It certainly would not have been overturned if it had been given.

[Devils_Advocate]

Never looking to fall out with you DA. I was just telling you the order of events after watching it several times, as you say yourself you are not 100%.

Fair enough and thanks, hopefully I'll get a chance to take a look myself

[dougcollins]

Not for me. Would have been very disappointed to concede one similar.

[DCWat]

I’ve not seen it back and so I can only base my view on seeing it live and the image above.

The ball was fired at him from no distance at all, Ward-Prowse has his back to the ball and little of any reaction time. I really don’t want to see penalties given for this, whether that’s for us or against us.

[NewClaret]

Hard one:

It was a bit further away than the picture suggests. His arms were out in an unnatural position I’d say, it actually hit both arms & the latter very low down.

I think he’s lucky to have got away with it. Just hope it doesn’t come down to GD!!!

[spt_claret]

Never a penalty for me.
Ask yourself - would we be outraged if that was given against us? Answer is yes for me.

The letter of the law rarely means anything in football anymore anyway between things being subject to interpretation and the endless inconsistencies. Only consistency you can find is in how you judge it yourself.

I'd be fuming if that was given against us, so not a pen.

[Tricky Trevor]

I’ve not seen it back and so I can only base my view on seeing it live and the image above.

The ball was fired at him from no distance at all, Ward-Prowse has his back to the ball and little of any reaction time. I really don’t want to see penalties given for this, whether that’s for us or against us.

The problem with stills. As I said earlier he was front on and turned his back, it was the turning that threw his arm out to the side. Unfortunately you can’t see the yellow streak down his back for the yellow jersey.