• Sunderland's first pen

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 2:40 am**

It's not even close to being close

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 2:52 am**

He tripped over his own foot....the second one was even worse.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 3:19 am**

And it was a stride outside the penalty area.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 3:26 am**

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 6:45 am**

Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 2:52 am
He tripped over his own foot....the second one was even worse.

No he didn’t.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:34 am**

Might have got away with one there, CJER would probably have been sent off if it was given as a free kick outside the box.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:43 am**

The Sunderland player clipped his own foot .CJ didn't touch him and it was outside the box.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:52 am**

Those pictures tell you nothing. I’ll try and see it in slow mo on tv later.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:57 am**

I actually think CJ does clip him as he's running across his wake, but it's purely unintentional and it's definitely outside the box. And for what it's worth, I don't think the second one is a penalty either.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:10 am**

As much as I think the ref was a useless clown, I 100% blame his assistant for this decision. His job is to be perfectly in line with the last defender for offside decisions. How he could not see, like everybody else in the stadium that it was clearly outside the box is astonishing.

Clearly didn't want to upset his mate with the whistle, the sooner these goones are replaced with AI the better..

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:14 am**

Andreshotboots wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:10 am
As much as I think the ref was a useless clown, I 100% blame his assistant for this decision. His job is to be perfectly in line with the last defender for offside decisions. How he could not see, like everybody else in the stadium that it was clearly outside the box is astonishing.

Clearly didn't want to upset his mate with the whistle, the sooner these goones are replaced with AI the better..

You’re correct about the assistant. He was shocking all game. Several times he needed to make a decision but waited until the ref decided then put his flag up.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:25 am**

Andreshotboots wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:10 am

Clearly didn't want to upset his mate with the whistle, the sooner these goones are replaced with AI the better..

Agreed. It's failure in one way or another all over the country every week. Last night was a total farce of officiating. Could perhaps give the ref (who was dire) the benefit of the doubt and say he couldn't see the one for the first pen. But there's no excuse for the liner on that side not to correct him.

Get the robots in!

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:34 am**

beddie wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:14 am
You’re correct about the assistant. He was shocking all game. Several times he needed to make a decision but waited until the ref decided then put his flag up.

That’s usually the refs pre-game instruction though

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:38 am**

Pretty sure there was contact. On the tv CJ appeared to be arguing it was outside rather than no contact. Saved him a suspension though

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 9:09 am**

The AR will presumably have been going off the guidance given to him by the ref in what officials call the "pre-match".
This is where the ref explains their expectations for the assistants. It's mostly the same every week, from my experiences, but with one or two subtle differences at times.
Also remember that the officials at Championship level have comms kits to keep in touch with one another, so it was probably being discussed in real time. The officials get one look at something and it happens incredibly fast. (Even at the level I am at, with one viewing, it can ben incredibly difficult at times.)
I am not for one moment making excuses, but a camera at a completely different height and angle can give you a much better view from up in the stands than a human at the same level as the action.
Also, the AI or whatever is only coming in for offsides, as I understand it, and wouldn't come in on decisions like this?
I'll take my Devil's Advocate hat off now

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 9:10 am**

SouthamptonClaret wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:38 am
Pretty sure there was contact. On the tv CJ appeared to be arguing it was outside rather than no contact. Saved him a suspension though

It was outside the box and offside.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 9:11 am**

The 2nd pen was very soft. Minimal contact. No worse than contact on Flemming

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:17 am**

I've looked at this a few times and it's difficult to judge if there was any contact at all.

For it to be a foul there needs to be contact, deliberate or otherwise. I can see why the ref thinks there is contact but he and we also know that the way Isidor went down is exactly how a player seeking a penalty will act. I would think the ref, looking at the whole picture, sees a player through on goal looking like he's been tripped, a most likely scenario. He should also know that all footballers at this level are cheats. How can you weigh all that up to come to a decision on one fast paced view? He decides it was a foul and I can't blame him for that.

Of course it was not in the penalty area and a good assistant would spot this. So would VAR.

And as has been pointed out, we got lucky as not only was the penalty saved but had it been given outside the box Egan-Riley would be off, leaving us twelve plus minutes to play with ten men - could we have survived that - and E-R suspended one match - the Plymouth game, not so bad!

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:24 am**

Seeing it live my immediate thought was that he had tripped himself and then dived. Seeing it again in slo-mo that still seems to be the most likely scenario, so he thoroughly deserved his fate in missing the pens.
The performance of the linesman was every bit as bad as the ref throughout the game. The left back committed numerous fouls on Anthony and should have been booked relatively early in the first half. It all happened under his nose.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:30 am**

just a quick update...Trafford saved both of them.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:33 am**

Cj was open and honest and never claimed not touch him. Simply said it was outside the box

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:37 am**

Tall Paul wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:34 am
Might have got away with one there, CJER would probably have been sent off if it was given as a free kick outside the box.

That's absolutely the case.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:44 am**

CharlieinNewMexico wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 8:34 am
That’s usually the refs pre-game instruction though

In some cases yes but in others I know that the ref will tell the assistants before kick off to give what they see and if it gets into dispute he (the ref) will make the decision unless VAR is active in that particular game.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:58 am**

Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 2:52 am
He tripped over his own foot....the second one was even worse.

100% this AND outside the box

Won't identify the CHEAT, but there was some CHEATING going on. There had been some attempts at conning the Ref earlier in the game, but I can't say who they were

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 12:42 pm**

I don’t need to see any replays or freeze frames, it was screamingly obvious from my seat in the north stand upper (towards the Jimmy Mac end) that it wasn’t even close to being in the area. But it wasn’t a foul anyway, CJ doesn’t attempt to tackle and doesn’t attempt to get in the way, it’s a (very) slight accidental touch which causes the striker to dive into the penalty area.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 3:22 pm**

RalphCoatesComb wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:58 am
100% this AND outside the box

Won't identify the CHEAT, but there was some CHEATING going on. There had been some attempts at conning the Ref earlier in the game, but I can't say who they were

Mr Comb, there are always attempts to cheat the ref. When did you last see a game when there wasn't? Possibly when your namesake was playing!

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 5:19 pm**

chekhov wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 6:45 am
No he didn’t.

He did.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 5:22 pm**

https://www.footballinsider247.com/excl ... rnley-red/

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 5:24 pm**

beddie wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:44 am
In some cases yes but in others I know that the ref will tell the assistants before kick off to give what they see and if it gets into dispute he (the ref) will make the decision unless VAR is active in that particular game.

Surely this can't be right with refs deciding game by game. Any ref who tells a lino not to give decisions and leave them all to him is an egotistical maniac.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 6:35 pm**

Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 5:19 pm
He did.

All I will say is that in the interview on Sky, Egan Riley said, “I knew (it was outside the box)”. He didn’t say he didn’t clip his heal which he would have said if that was the case.
https://www.skysports.com/football/burn ... ort/509655

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 6:51 pm**

With all of the replaying of the incident, freeze frames etc. wouldn’t it be a lot simpler just to have VAR

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:15 pm**

whentheballmoves wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 9:09 am
The AR will presumably have been going off the guidance given to him by the ref in what officials call the "pre-match".
This is where the ref explains their expectations for the assistants. It's mostly the same every week, from my experiences, but with one or two subtle differences at times.
Also remember that the officials at Championship level have comms kits to keep in touch with one another, so it was probably being discussed in real time. The officials get one look at something and it happens incredibly fast. (Even at the level I am at, with one viewing, it can ben incredibly difficult at times.)
I am not for one moment making excuses, but a camera at a completely different height and angle can give you a much better view from up in the stands than a human at the same level as the action.
Also, the AI or whatever is only coming in for offsides, as I understand it, and wouldn't come in on decisions like this?
I'll take my Devil's Advocate hat off now

I get your point, but the AR probably had the best view in the house to see where that impact was. If we're stating it was to fast for him to call, how on earth is he going to spot an offside whilst watching the players, and also when the ball is kicked, whilst running..

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:25 pm**

Hipper wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 3:22 pm
Mr Comb, there are always attempts to cheat the ref. When did you last see a game when there wasn't? Possibly when your namesake was playing!

You are so right, but there were "cheats" even then. Leeds weren't just DIRTY

Some Sunderland players were playing for penalties - more than the norm. I wasn't surprised when Mr Backhander gave the first penalty

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:34 pm**

Pen 1
Looked to be contact but clearly started outside the box
Lino should have seen that
VAR would have done which shows why it is needed

Pen 2
Again there was contact but that was because Sonne had gone to ground and was just sliding towards the goal line
As he slid forward their guy did try and move backwards and they made contact
Not intentional and comms guy said on review the footage that it was very harsh
VAR could well have overturned that decision as well
Which is why it is needed

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:40 pm**

Pen 2. Don't think VAR would overrule
One view I thought no pen, but from another, definitely a pen, so it's a pen.
No blame on Sonne, just one of those things and Trafford dug him out of a hole.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:52 pm**

Darnhill Claret wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:40 pm
Pen 2. Don't think VAR would overrule
One view I thought no pen, but from another, definitely a pen, so it's a pen.
No blame on Sonne, just one of those things and Trafford dug him out of a hole.

I do blame Sonne, in that situation you stay on your feet.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:53 pm**

jojomk1 wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 7:34 pm
Pen 1
Looked to be contact but clearly started outside the box
Lino should have seen that
VAR would have done which shows why it is needed

Pen 2
Again there was contact but that was because Sonne had gone to ground and was just sliding towards the goal line
As he slid forward their guy did try and move backwards and they made contact
Not intentional and comms guy said on review the footage that it was very harsh
VAR could well have overturned that decision as well
Which is why it is needed

The thing is though the clubs pre season had supposedly had meetings with the PGMOL or whatever it is, where they were told all contact doesn't mean it's a foul, and in last night's cases, 2 penalty kicks. I thought the first was just a running stride clash, outside the bix obviously and CJ made no attempt tonactual foul him.

The second, yes he's gone to ground but he's at no point gone towards the player, Sonne held his line. To me both incidents added up don't make 1 penalty kick, let alone 2..

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:41 pm**

Hipper wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 11:17 am
I've looked at this a few times and it's difficult to judge if there was any contact at all.

For it to be a foul there needs to be contact, deliberate or otherwise. I can see why the ref thinks there is contact but he and we also know that the way Isidor went down is exactly how a player seeking a penalty will act. I would think the ref, looking at the whole picture, sees a player through on goal looking like he's been tripped, a most likely scenario. He should also know that all footballers at this level are cheats. How can you weigh all that up to come to a decision on one fast paced view? He decides it was a foul and I can't blame him for that.

Of course it was not in the penalty area and a good assistant would spot this. So would VAR.

And as has been pointed out, we got lucky as not only was the penalty saved but had it been given outside the box Egan-Riley would be off, leaving us twelve plus minutes to play with ten men - could we have survived that - and E-R suspended one match - the Plymouth game, not so bad!

I don't see why we're all assuming that the ref thought the foul was committed in the action of making a tackle. It didn't look like a tackle to me. Isn't it likely that the ref thought there was cover by the other defender, or that the ball was going too far away?

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2025 12:05 pm**

Bosscat wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 18, 2025 5:22 pm
https://www.footballinsider247.com/excl ... rnley-red/

Hackett is talking rubbish saying Trafford should have been sent off

If he was booked for “time wasting” for the first penalty, he wouldn’t have tried it for the second

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2025 12:26 pm**

First one was tight but looked offside, outside the box and not even a foul. Other than that it was a clear penalty.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2025 12:43 pm**

The fact he managed to throw himself almost to the byline probably swayed the partially sighted ref that it must have happened in the box

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2025 2:04 pm**

It was not a foul, outside the box and possibly offside. A bit like when Arsenal scored from a corner a few years ago. The corner should have been a goal kick, it was after the end of added time, they played a short corner, the scorer handled the ball and was offside. Otherwise it was a good goal

Sunderland's first pen

Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen

Re: Sunderland's first pen