Time to retire, his comments on the "penalty" were embarrassing.

Very embarrassing indeed.

Why, please explain?

50/50 decision for me. He is right, anywhere else on the pitch it's a foul.

Paid to be “edgy”?

ClaretDiver wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 8:59 pm

Why, please explain?

Saying it was a genuine penalty. Really? Imagine if Rovers got that against us at the Turf in August.

NickBFC wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:00 pm

50/50 decision for me. He is right, anywhere else on the pitch it's a foul.

If its a 50/50 decision, it shouldn't be going to var.

AmbleClaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:01 pm

Saying it was a genuine penalty. Really? Imagine if Rovers got that against us at the Turf in August.

They have had worse

He was spot on. Neville spouting garbage as usual. This is one of those decisions that when people reflect they will realise it was the right decision.

quoonbeatz wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:01 pm

If its a 50/50 decision, it shouldn't be going to var.

Agree, but when I saw the angle looking across the pitch I would have given it.

It's a clear foul. People can argue whether it's too soft to be a penalty. But he completely misses the ball and plays the man. If I was trying to block a shot I sure as hell wouldn't do it as stupidly as that.

The penalty was similar to the one we conceded at Villa.

A quick look on X will show the general feeling, not one person agreeing with him. However, it's an opinion based forum on here.My opinion is he's wrong.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:03 pm

It's a clear foul. People can argue whether it's too soft to be a penalty. But he completely misses the ball and plays the man. If I was trying to block a shot I sure as hell wouldn't do it as stupidly as that.

Who did you play for out of interest?

Contact happens because the Dutch lad has his leg there and Kane follows thru and strikes his boot. That’s not a foul in my book.

Wright says it’s reckless. It clearly isn’t. The Dutch lad Dumfries doesn’t really challenge for the ball, he throws a leg up in hope he’ll get a block in. He doesn’t and Kane strikes him not the other way round.

If that goes against Stones, I’d be fuming.

It’s a bad shout, but I’ll take it - we’ve had plenty against us over the years.

AmbleClaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:01 pm

Saying it was a genuine penalty. Really? Imagine if Rovers got that against us at the Turf in August.

Imagine if WE DIDN'T get it against rovers on the Turf.

Juan Tanamera wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:16 pm

Imagine if WE DIDN'T get it against rovers on the Turf.

Right decision, it was never a penalty, end of.

50/50 for me, when you saw it back, he had his studs up, could have easily not have been given, but a Wright said anywhere else on the pitch and it's a free kick.

.

That’s how VAR should work 30 secs to confirm an offside.

Not a pen for me - but i would also say i dont know what a foul is anymore or handball. The game i grew up with in terms of the rules as people understood them and played them in the spirit of the game is gone - similar for offside when your a cm offside.

But he was 100% right, by modern standards it was a penalty.

I don't see how you can disagree with Wright. He said "in today's game it's a penalty".
He was also spot on in his comments regarding Watkins. England were calling out for someone to make runs and stretch play.

Agree with Wrighty. Today's game is littered with laughably bad refereeing decisions and the penalty here was no exception.

AmbleClaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:05 pm

A quick look on X will show the general feeling, not one person agreeing with him. However, it's an opinion based forum on here.My opinion is he's wrong.

That’s your first mistake if you’re looking on there. You certainly won’t get the “general feeling” from there. Try thinking for yourself instead of being told what to think.

Gary Neville absolutely correct on this one.

Never a penalty in a million years but we will take it.

All the games so far have been screaming for Watkins. Kanes been slow and immobile, They were **** scared of Watkins pace when he was introduced.

I shouted for a pen in real time for me the Dutch player just had one thing on his mind and that was to kick kane also there had been at least 3 other cynical challengers previous to the pen obviously they had set out to kick and bully us right from the start.Anyhow we won 2-1

AmbleClaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 9:24 pm

Right decision, it was never a penalty, end of.

But the decision was a penalty.
End of.

Prefer Ian Wright to Roy Keane
Keane is the one I would stand down

I'm not saying it was the right decision but how many times does a full back clear the ball, a striker comes to try and block but "clips" the defender - a freekick is given every time? It's that type of decision. Just happened to be in the box this time.

helmclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 10:34 pm

Gary Neville absolutely correct on this one.

Never a penalty in a million years but we will take it.

In Neville’s day, never a penalty. In today’s football, it probably is.

I don’t agree with the modern interpretation, the defender needed to make a challenge, Kane kicked his foot… Harsh to call that a penalty.

As well as being less exciting, modern football is just a bit too ******* soft.

Tbh it was even funnier that he booked Dumfries for it. Rancid officials.

Ptangyangkipperbang wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 10:37 pm

I shouted for a pen in real time for me the Dutch player just had one thing on his mind and that was to kick kane also there had been at least 3 other cynical challengers previous to the pen obviously they had set out to kick and bully us right from the start.Anyhow we won 2-1

I was thinking , what a plonker not to keep the ball under the bar. I saw the Dutch defender’s foot as purely incidental and nothing to do with a bad miss

DCWat wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 11:03 pm

In Neville’s day, never a penalty. In today’s football, it probably is.

I don’t agree with the modern interpretation, the defender needed to make a challenge, Kane kicked his foot… Harsh to call that a penalty.

As well as being less exciting, modern football is just a bit too ******* soft.

Yup. Ditto with new offside laws and new handball laws.

The correct decision is no longer the “right” decision or the fair decision, but that’s the way FIFA want it.

What can we do, eh? At least it went in our favour tonight and we were worthy winners.

DCWat wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 11:03 pm

In Neville’s day, never a penalty. In today’s football, it probably is.

I don’t agree with the modern interpretation, the defender needed to make a challenge, Kane kicked his foot… Harsh to call that a penalty.

As well as being less exciting, modern football is just a bit too ******* soft.

I play football three times a week and that is never a penalty.

Definitely not a penalty. Dumfries does not even have his weight going into the ball because he is leaning back to make a block and he is side on to the ball. Kane shoots and follows through and kicks Dumfries and it is a normal coming together in that situation.
Kane's rolling aroung on the pitch afterwards was embarrassing and his only intent was to gain a decision in his favour. Thanks to the wonderful world of VAR he achieved his objective, however, I think that this was more because the media made a big thing about the referee's history than anything else.
The VAR intervention really out the referee in a stupid situation although he should have stuck with the original decision of a goal kick.

Didn't hear Wright's comments, but I thought it was a foul. Anywhere else on the pitch or if that is the attacker following through on a defender then it's not even a controversial foul, got the man and not the ball.

Kane got his shot away. It’s never a pen.

Poulton-le-Claret wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 11:09 pm

Didn't hear Wright's comments, but I thought it was a foul. Anywhere else on the pitch or if that is the attacker following through on a defender then it's not even a controversial foul, got the man and not the ball.

Kane got the ball and missed with is shot, he then got the man because it was he who kicked his opponent, there was no follow through by the defender because he was actually leaning back. To give a penalty and a yellow card was just a laughable decision.
Goal kick and carry on would have been the correct decision and there was absolutely no need for any third person intervention.
The game at the highest level is becoming more farcical week by week, however, we are definitely getting closer to every physical contact being penalised one way or another with countless stoppages in the game.

helmclaret wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 11:11 pm

Kane got his shot away. It’s never a pen.

I agree - I don't think that should be a penalty.

The modern rules probably say that he was reckless and shouldn’t have ‘shown his studs’.

PremierLeagueClass wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 10:33 pm

That’s your first mistake if you’re looking on there. You certainly won’t get the “general feeling” from there. Try thinking for yourself instead of being told what to think.

Perfectly capable of thinking for myself, thank you. Condescending opinions not required, but thanks for thinking you can tell me what to say and do. Goodnight.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 11:14 pm

Kane got the ball and missed with is shot, he then got the man because it was he who kicked his opponent, there was no follow through by the defender because he was actually leaning back. To give a penalty and a yellow card was just a laughable decision.
Goal kick and carry on would have been the correct decision and there was absolutely no need for any third person intervention.
The game at the highest level is becoming more farcical week by week, however, we are definitely getting closer to every physical contact being penalised one way or another with countless stoppages in the game.

Fair enough if you disagree, I just watched it back and still think the same. Dumfries' doesn't pull out of the challenge, his foot is moving towards Kane at the point of impact and doesn't get the ball.

See them given all the time when it is the striker attempting to block a defender clearing the ball.

Wasn’t a pen for me but I love Ian Wright! Great pundit and proper England fan.

I wonder why we need these old pros to tell us what we have seen.
Football is soft as shyte these days, that's why the penalty was awarded.
These old hacks are just put there to create argument.

Ashingtonclaret46 wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 10, 2024 11:08 pm

Kane's rolling aroung on the pitch afterwards was embarrassing

His ankle had connected with the defender's studs - believe me, that hurts every time! I only play walking football nowadays but it still hurts when flesh hits studs.

Kane got to the ball first and the defender hit him late. Obvious foul anywhere on the pitch.

Having played football as a striker I’m
behind what wright is saying. You can’t clatter someone after you’ve passed or shot. It’s in the rule books but for so long defenders or keepers have gotten away with it . Clear pen

The pen we won with at Anfield had similarities. Barnes knocked the ball over Allison, who cleaned him out. The ball was going wide but was still in play. Penalty was correct then and it was tonight.
Ball was live, Dumfries missed the ball and kicked Kane. Pen.

Studs showing and the foot was high(ish). Until a year or two ago probably wouldn’t have been given, but these days, with the instructions refs are given around player safety it can probably be filed under ‘one of those’. We’ve certainly been on the wrong end of similar.

At the time I didn’t think it was, and it’s understandable why the Dutch will feel hard done by, but such are the natures of rule and guidance changes. Sometimes our own interpretations need time to catch up. Neville’s angry man performance is understandable, when he played it probably wouldn’t have been given, but he’s not a player now he’s a pundit and the game continues to move on.