Assignon incident.

[burnleymik]

Surely there is a replay that actually shows the contact then?

The camera angle at the time wasn't great as you saw, as it was zoomed too far out, but I haven't seen a proper replay of Son going across the back of him up close, only those from the split second after when Son is already on the other side of him.

It just seems insane he would go down in that position, with no-one near him, if he hadn't been touched. I hope we do see some conclusive evidence.

[Jakubclaret]

The camera angle at the time wasn't great as you saw, as it was zoomed too far out, but I haven't seen a proper replay of Son going across the back of him up close, only those from the split second after when Son is already on the other side of him.

It just seems insane he would go down in that position, with no-one near him, if he hadn't been touched. I hope we do see some conclusive evidence.

Not half as insane as a desperate man searching for the equalizer with the clock fast ticking away & the threat of relegation looming large.

[Spindles]

Looks pretty clear cut from this what actually happened.
https://www.reddit.com/r/coys/comments/ ... for_a_var/

Have you looked down the thread to the second lot of videos - quite clearly shows Son crossing close behind him. Couple that with how his right leg is coming through from the left hand side proves that it was clipped across and behind his left leg. Definitely a penalty and I understand why he was so angry especially with all the other hard done to stuff he's faced over the last few games.
no excuse for the faking of injury though

[burnleymik]

There is no trip. Some people just can't handle the fact that one of our players cheated.

So you can prove that he wasn't clipped?

[NewClaret]

Have you looked down the thread to the second lot of videos - quite clearly shows Son crossing close behind him. Couple that with how his right leg is coming through from the left hand side proves that it was clipped across and behind his left leg. Definitely a penalty and I understand why he was so angry especially with all the other hard done to stuff he's faced over the last few games.
no excuse for the faking of injury though

I don’t see any second set of videos when I scroll down? Any pointers as to how to find them? Don’t really understand reddit so probably something obvious I’m not doing right.

[Jakubclaret]

Have you looked down the thread to the second lot of videos - quite clearly shows Son crossing close behind him. Couple that with how his right leg is coming through from the left hand side proves that it was clipped across and behind his left leg. Definitely a penalty and I understand why he was so angry especially with all the other hard done to stuff he's faced over the last few games.
no excuse for the faking of injury though

I've looked at everything & all I can see is somebody tripping themselves up & trying to con the referee.

[Spindles]

https://streamin.me/v/99ed6190

Here's the link. Son's knee whacks into assignon's foot, his hands immediately go up "not me guv" and down goes our man

[Jakubclaret]

https://streamin.me/v/99ed6190

Here's the link. Son's knee whacks into assignon's foot, his hands immediately go up "not me guv" and down goes our man

I've tried looking & I can't see anything from that camera angle but from the other angle it's clear. Maybe I need to get myself down to Specsavers or vision express.

[NewClaret]

https://streamin.me/v/99ed6190

Here's the link. Son's knee whacks into assignon's foot, his hands immediately go up "not me guv" and down goes our man

Thanks for that.

I see it now. Would’ve been a weak one but certainly no weaker than the one Villa were given against us.

Assignon must be furious about the way the pens have worked out against him this year.

Having seen that again, he was 100% right to go down & claim for it. A pen there with 6 mins to go would’ve given a chance.

[Rick_Muller]

https://streamin.me/v/99ed6190

Here's the link. Son's knee whacks into assignon's foot, his hands immediately go up "not me guv" and down goes our man

Thanks for that. This confirms exactly what I saw (with my own eyes about 25 yards from the stand)

I’ve highlighted the point at which Spurs player clips Assignon’s foot with their knee.

IMG_7827.jpeg (99.98 KiB) Viewed 1538 times

[Vegas Claret]

I don't care if it's a pen or not, he rolled around like he'd been shot then acted like a 5 year old. Not something I like to see from anyone wearing a Burnley kit.

[Jakubclaret]

Thanks for that. This confirms exactly what I saw (with my own eyes about 25 yards from the stand)

I’ve highlighted the point at which Spurs player clips Assignon’s foot with their knee.
IMG_7827.jpeg

It's just a blurry grainy blob which isn't clear.

[Rick_Muller]

I don't care if it's a pen or not, he rolled around like he'd been shot then acted like a 5 year old. Not something I like to see from anyone wearing a Burnley kit.

Oh that I agree with, I said on the match thread that he should get out of our club for that behaviour. I’m merely discussing whether he was clipped or not, and from that link above he was.

Now to get the conspiracy theorists going - why didn’t they show the whole incident in slow mo from the close up angle on MoTD from about a second earlier? Is it because it would show the initial contact that caused Assignon to kick his own leg?

[Vegas Claret]

Oh that I agree with, I said on the match thread that he should get out of our club for that behaviour. I’m merely discussing whether he was clipped or not, and from that link above he was.

Now to get the conspiracy theorists going - why didn’t they show the whole incident in slow mo from the close up angle on MoTD from about a second earlier? Is it because it would show the initial contact that caused Assignon to kick his own leg?

I didn't watch MOTD, my bigger question would be if that's at the other end does it get given ? I think we all know the answer

[Rick_Muller]

It's just a blurry grainy blob which isn't clear.

Stop being obtuse and watch the video - highlighting the point of contact is to assist those like you where to look for it

[burnleymik]

https://streamin.me/v/99ed6190

Here's the link. Son's knee whacks into assignon's foot, his hands immediately go up "not me guv" and down goes our man

Thought so. Shame how many people on here were so quick to throw the lad under the bus and call him a flat out cheat.

[Jakubclaret]

Stop being obtuse and watch the video - highlighting the point of contact is to assist those like you where to look for it

It's far from clear & there's a white object in-between son's knee & assignons leg which looks larger than assignons foot. If you are trying to present a convincing argument back it up with a clear picture or a video because all I'm seeing is somebody trip themselves up. I'm really trying to see something else but if it's not there it's not there.

[RVclaret]

https://streamin.me/v/99ed6190

Here's the link. Son's knee whacks into assignon's foot, his hands immediately go up "not me guv" and down goes our man

Thought so.

[elwaclaret]

Thought so. Shame how many people on here were so quick to throw the lad under the bus and call him a flat out cheat.

It comes down to questioning whether the impact was/not enough to cause him to go down. Yes, seemingly innocuous contact can cause players to lose balance… but when you remember Billy Hamilton carrying three defenders hanging off his back most fans would prefer to see him fight to take the chance and end up in a heap in the effort rather than to throw himself to the floor… and is why so many criticise how ‘easily’ players go down in the modern game. It also looks a lot better than feigning injury and when they do it several times a game all over the pitch, why referees tend to ignore the possibility he was nocked off balance and just assume he’s trying to buy a penalty.

[Spindles]

It's just a blurry grainy blob which isn't clear.

Stop doubling down, he clearly gets caught as he brings his right leg through. Just try and run and make your legs do what assignon's clearly do in the clear clip. In order to do that yourself you have to twist your body and place your left foot at least a foot out of line. Just accept you jumped the gun on calling cheat.

[BurnleyFC]

That should’ve been a penalty and Assignon had every right to go down and be aggrieved that one wasn’t given.

[burnleymik]

It comes down to questioning whether the impact was/not enough to cause him to go down. Yes, seemingly innocuous contact can cause players to lose balance… but when you remember Billy Hamilton carrying three defenders hanging off his back most fans would prefer to see him fight to take the chance and end up in a heap in the effort rather than to throw himself to the floor… and is why so many criticise how ‘easily’ players go down in the modern game. It also looks a lot better than feigning injury and when they do it several times a game all over the pitch, why referees tend to ignore the possibility he was nocked off balance and just assume he’s trying to buy a penalty.

He was running to be fair to the lad and when someone catches you like that you lose balance. He didn't dive, he was tripped, that's the difference.

[quoonbeatz]

It's the bit from 15 seconds on in that video, that shows why he's a cheat.

[Big Vinny K]

Thought so. Shame how many people on here were so quick to throw the lad under the bus and call him a flat out cheat.

There’s clearly contact but he did also cheat.
Strictly by the rules it’s a penalty.
Personally I would change the rules that if you exaggerate the fall and roll about in an attempt to deceive the officials then the penalty gets chalked off. If you do this and there is no contact you get red carded.
I realise that the former would be very subjective and hard to implement but the second one would not be.

Whatever way you look at the incident yesterday it was embarrassing to see one of our players react in this way and feigning injury. For one of our own players to grab him up off the floor tells you what his own team mates thought.

[Spindles]

It's far from clear & there's a white object in-between son's knee & assignons leg which looks larger than assignons foot. If you are trying to present a convincing argument back it up with a clear picture or a video because all I'm seeing is somebody trip themselves up. I'm really trying to see something else but if it's not there it's not there.

It's clear, you see the knee contact, the leg flex to the left and son throw his arms up. Stonewall penalty and not a soft one as it completely throws assignon's leg out of line.
stop being a troll jakub

[Jakubclaret]

Stop doubling down, he clearly gets caught as he brings his right leg through. Just try and run and make your legs do what assignon's clearly do in the clear clip. In order to do that yourself you have to twist your body and place your left foot at least a foot out of line. Just accept you jumped the gun on calling cheat.

I'll admit something is there & something happened without seeing it. I'm comfortable with that because I'm not the only person sharing that view bolstered even by some BFC fans nevermind by the other non BFC fans if the reddit forums hold any clout. I'll agree & join the hard done to band wagon. Yes we should have got a penalty & then we would have that momentum to get the second & when forest beat us in the showdown face off that wouldn't have happened had the spurs game been officiated correctly. It's been a massive stitch up this relegation lark

[elwaclaret]

He was running to be fair to the lad and when someone catches you like that you lose balance. He didn't dive, he was tripped, that's the difference.

An impact like that would risk a twisted ankle… as he tried to plant his foot losing his balance. It was not his standing leg. He would have fallen much differently and at a different angle had that been the case. IMO a trip is where the standing foot is taken before it hits the ground… by the time he went down he had not only taken that step but there was clear daylight between himself and Song.

[Rileybobs]

I still can’t see any contact between the players, the videos and images aren’t clear at all. Not sure why the footage from the reverse angle doesn’t show the point of contact, if indeed there was one.

Regardless of whether there was contact or not, Assignon still cheated by feigning an injury so those who called him a cheat were right to do so.

[Spindles]

Watch the video Elwa,

[Jakubclaret]

I still can’t see any contact between the players, the videos and images aren’t clear at all. Not sure why the footage from the reverse angle doesn’t show the point of contact, if indeed there was one.

Regardless of whether there was contact or not, Assignon still cheated by feigning an injury so those who called him a cheat were right to do so.

You can't see it because it isn't there

[Spindles]

I'm not saying we were stitched up and everyone is out to get us but these last few weeks assignon has been served up like a kipper 3 times by refereeing decisions

[Jakubclaret]

It's clear, you see the knee contact, the leg flex to the left and son throw his arms up. Stonewall penalty and not a soft one as it completely throws assignon's leg out of line.
stop being a troll jakub

I'll agree he should have had a penalty.

[Spindles]

There’s clearly contact but he did also cheat.
Strictly by the rules it’s a penalty.
Personally I would change the rules that if you exaggerate the fall and roll about in an attempt to deceive the officials then the penalty gets chalked off. If you do this and there is no contact you get red carded.
I realise that the former would be very subjective and hard to implement but the second one would not be.

Whatever way you look at the incident yesterday it was embarrassing to see one of our players react in this way and feigning injury. For one of our own players to grab him up off the floor tells you what his own team mates thought.

Just to be clear, are you saying assignon was trying to con the ref into giving a penalty that shouldn't have been given. Or that he was cheating by lying on the ground feigning injury to get the var to look at it.

I wasn't at the game so I don't know if there was avar check that went up on the screens

[burnleymik]

An impact like that would risk a twisted ankle… as he tried to plant his foot losing his balance. It was not his standing leg. He would have fallen much differently and at a different angle had that been the case. IMO a trip is where the standing foot is taken before it hits the ground… by the time he went down he had not only taken that step but there was clear daylight between himself and Song.

behave.

[daveisaclaret]

Regardless of whether Son touches him, that's not a foul. It is a contact sport and Assignon tripping over himself after incidental contact isn't a penalty. His behaviour afterwards is really rather awful.

[elwaclaret]

I'm not saying we were stitched up and everyone is out to get us but these last few weeks assignon has been served up like a kipper 3 times by refereeing decisions

No argument with your opinion on the previous occasions, the Chelsea foul should certainly have been given, but I’m not convinced about the one yesterday. TBF I have not seen the full build up to the performance in slow motion, and the fact he went down made me wonder… but my first reaction was he thought another player taking a spot kick was the better option than him trying to shoot. His antics after was embarrassing, I think O’sea’s reaction was mild compared to how I’d have reacted on the pitch given the circumstances.

[Spindles]

Anyone still calling self trip after watching the link I posted doesn't understand biomechanics.

Still not had anyone confirm if a var check took place

[Hibsclaret]

The issue goes back to whether or not teams like ours get the onfield decision. I think from what I can see Son touches our lad slightly and that knocks his leg onto the other one to trip himself up. If the onfield decision is given as no foul there is nowhere near enough contact to overturn it.

This brings us onto the real problem of VAR and the fact that we don’t get onfield decisions. At the other end the onfield decision is probably pen which cannot be overturned for the same reasons. This goes back to this threshold of being able to overturn if clear and obvious. The only thing clear and obvious all season is that we don’t get onfield decisions. Double jeopardy at its finest particularly when the odd onfield decision we do get (such as the winner at Forest) we end up getting the decision overturned and a grovelling apology! You couldn’t make it up tbh.

[Rick_Muller]

Anyone still calling self trip after watching the link I posted doesn't understand biomechanics.

Still not had anyone confirm if a var check took place

No VAR in the ground but that’s not to say it wasn’t checked

[BurnleyFC]

There’s definitely enough contact to overturn the onfield decision if the not fit for purpose VAR had actually got involved.

It’s an accidental trip by Son, but that’s irrelevant. Stonewall penalty.

[burnleymik]

No VAR in the ground but that’s not to say it wasn’t checked

It looked like the ref stood listening to the earpiece afterwards, so I think it was given a quick check, but because it wasn't obvious, as can be seen by these comments, they just went with the on field decision. Now if that was Son at the other end they would have scrutinised it until the penalty was given.

[Goliath]

Why are we having to guess and look at crap grainy images?
For basically evey incident in the Premier league we get given a proper close up replay, why not on this occasion? It seems strange.

[NewClaret]

I still can’t see any contact between the players, the videos and images aren’t clear at all. Not sure why the footage from the reverse angle doesn’t show the point of contact, if indeed there was one.

Regardless of whether there was contact or not, Assignon still cheated by feigning an injury so those who called him a cheat were right to do so.

The feigning injury is clearly to force VAR to check and slow the game down to force a proper look at it. You could tell that was his plan with his massive over reaction and TV screen gestures.

If play just continues you just know they take a partial glance at these things and ignore it. A break in play and some on field outrage puts VAR under a bit more pressure.

I’d agree that feigning injury and rolly polys are absolutely not for me or most Burnley fans, I find - Kompany would do well to make it part of his initial induction that general pansying is not received well here - but I think in this circumstance of 6 minutes to go and a possible penalty just could’ve given us an equaliser with a bit left to get a winnner… it was worth a shot and I can’t hold it against him!

[equinox]

Only one person knows for sure if Assignon was impeded and that's Assignon, no wonder he did what he did under the circumstances, he's a bit of a character to say the least and I think he conducted himself quite well tbh.

[Big Vinny K]

Just to be clear, are you saying assignon was trying to con the ref into giving a penalty that shouldn't have been given. Or that he was cheating by lying on the ground feigning injury to get the var to look at it.

I wasn't at the game so I don't know if there was avar check that went up on the screens

He exaggerated the impact of the fall and then rolled around several times. He was not injured and the contact did not cause him to roll around several times.
So yes he was trying to con the referee - why else does any player exaggerate a fall or roll around feigning injury ?

Whether there is contact or not (personally I think there is in this case) it is still cheating.
I think the interpretation of the rule recently has moved to there being “enough contact” to cause a player to go down. Not 100% sure but heard various pundits saying that recently there has been a change in how the officials are looking at these incidents.
Yesterday the momentum of Assignon meant that the slightest of touches meant he was going to fall. I presume that means it should be a penalty - but tbh it’s hard to keep track of the rules these days.

[Spindles]

i have to admit to the feigning of injury thing being awkward to witness but there is no way he exaggerates the fall. He whacks himself on the back of his calf ( not his foot or ankle) and is unable to bring his left leg through in time so collapses to the ground.

[mikeconroy10]

Clear pen. He's been stitched up by the widely shared angle that starts after the contact and makes Son seem miles away. Son obviously doesn't mean it, but that's irrelevant. He trips him in the box. Pen all day. The VAR check was remarkably quick which makes me wonder whether they bothered looking at this angle.

He can't react the way he did once it wasn't given, but I can forgive him a little bit as it was a crucial decision for us and the 2nd game in a row he's been denied a clear penalty.

[JimmyRobbo]

That is what happened. He was running at full speed and his trailing foot was clipped, knocking it across and into the back of his leg, causing him to trip over. The commentators descr4ibed it numerous times and were astonished it wasn't a penalty. He didn't just sprint and make his own leg hit the other and fall over, like is being made out here.

He did stay down too long, but he knew he had been clipped and frustration took over.

Yes, that's what the commentators were saying. I didn't see it, myself (genuinely just didn't see it).

[CrosspoolClarets]

What annoys me about this is the TV are selective about what they show afterwards. I saw it live on Peacock (US) on a huge TV and it was obvious immediately he had been clipped. But yesterday many on here were laying into him saying he wasn’t (plus the petulance, but like I wrote yesterday, excusable when your career can depend on it).

It was poor VAR, again. Quick check, wrong angle, but poor reffing from Gillett again because those who have played the game know that was a clip from Son.

[boatshed bill]

What annoys me about this is the TV are selective about what they show afterwards. I saw it live on Peacock (US) on a huge TV and it was obvious immediately he had been clipped. But yesterday many on here were laying into him saying he wasn’t (plus the petulance, but like I wrote yesterday, excusable when your career can depend on it).

It was poor VAR, again. Quick check, wrong angle, but poor reffing from Gillett again because those who have played the game know that was a clip from Son.

Interesting. Having watched it on the telly it looks nowhere near a foul.