Sunderland’s second penalty

[MDWat]

I’ve seen a thread on the first penalty, which I think every man and his dog agree can’t be a penalty.

But the second one seems worthy of more debate. It looks a clear penalty to me. Sonne unnecessarily slides in and whilst Cirkin’s foot lands on Sonne, I’m not sure where else he’s supposed to put it and he’s only putting it there because Sonne has slid in and got nowhere near the ball.

I’ve seen plenty of people argue it’s not a penalty.

What’s the consensus?

[bigdavethemaddog]

never touched him

[dougcollins]

Didn't the ref say it was for handball?

[Pickles]

Quite clearly a penalty.

[Paulclaret]

If that was a penalty, so was the foul on Flemming. If the ref had given that, I don't think people would be arguing about the Sonne one.

[MDWat]

Didn't the ref say it was for handball?

I had seen that mentioned. If that’s true, then it’s an absolutely diabolical decision!

[ElectroClaret]

Peno for me, took his legs away.
Had that been up the other end and not been given, we'd now have a separate
six page thread on here with almost every contributor frothing at the mouth
at how corrupt the ref was in not giving it.

[bobinho]

No pen for me…

At the time, in real time and watching live, I thought it was.

[whentheballmoves]

Ref looked to say "didn't play the ball" to me, but I could be wrong.
He slides in, misses the ball, gets the player. It's a penalty for me.

[Tricky Trevor]

Sonne tackle pen for me.
Flemming had already missed the ball and though there is contact it is minimal and incidental.
I screamed pen as I saw it but on replay not for me.
Regardless of those two decisions the ref was a disgrace.

[Robbie_painter]

Sonne tackle pen for me.
Flemming had already missed the ball and though there is contact it is minimal and incidental.
I screamed pen as I saw it but on replay not for me.
Regardless of those two decisions the ref was a disgrace.

Don’t think Fleming had missed the ball think he was waiting for it to come on to his right foot,should really have just swung his left at it from such close range.

[Inchy]

It’s one of them that’s harsh is it’s given and harsh if it’s not. I’d be annoyed if we didn’t get that pen.

The ref seemed hell bent of giving Sunderland the best possible chance to win last night, and they failed

[Tufty]

Actually have to say that normal real-time angle not a penalty; 1st replay with camera behind goal line on Sonnes back, not a penalty; 2nd replay from touchline with camera on Sunderland players back, definite penalty....no argument. Sonne scythes him down completely.

1st penalty happens so quick that you can excuse the ref for not seeing the exact inch on the ground where the contact was made and he falls yards inside the box so in a way cons the referee. He was clean through in any case and in a real good goal scoring position so the foul was worthy of a penalty.

Can't quite understand the wrath of the ref....if anything his mistake was in not giving a red card because he's booked him to confirm it's a deliberate foul and then not applied the laws of the game by sending him off, which states incompetence.

Only seen the 4 minutes match highlights so can't comment on the rest of his performance.

[Poulton-le-Claret]

Penalty for me, no idea what Sonne was thinking there, totally unnecessary.

[KlyBfc]

I’ve seen a thread on the first penalty, which I think every man and his dog agree can’t be a penalty.

But the second one seems worthy of more debate. It looks a clear penalty to me. Sonne unnecessarily slides in and whilst Cirkin’s foot lands on Sonne, I’m not sure where else he’s supposed to put it and he’s only putting it there because Sonne has slid in and got nowhere near the ball.

I’ve seen plenty of people argue it’s not a penalty.

What’s the consensus?

Sonne is silly going to ground, slides in front and doesn’t play the ball, not 100% sure who of the two initiates the contact so it being given is one of those that you can sort of understand. However my issue is that he looks at the Flemming one and says no. When the ball isn’t played and contact is made bybthevdefender from behind. It’s the inconsistency that i can’t stand.

[NewClaret]

It probably was but a very harsh one for me.

Sonne slides to block the cross, no attempt to make contact with the player, the player seems to initiate the contact.

That said, if you go to ground that’s the risk, but I think after denying us a very similar one, and giving them one for a tackle outside the box, to give that was harsh.

You have to have consistency and if Flemming’s wasn’t, that wasn’t. Or they both were.

[bumba]

Thought it was a pen in the ground then saw two angles on highlights when I was home one which was the refs view I can understand why he's given it but then the angle from behind the goal it looks a clear dive.
Tough to say it's a bad decision but his persistence in turning a blind eye to Sunderland's constant diving throughout the game encouraged them to take the opportunities to dive in the box, early yellow cards for diving would have stopped this happening.

[Papabendi]

Can't make tackles like that in the area unless its a last ditch attempt to save a goal - then the odds are it might be worth attempting

[KernowHouseClaret]

Interesting how both sky pundits after the match isn't think it was, their interpretation was Sonne tracked the ball with his slide to block any possible cross or cut back, both thought Sunderland player had then caught Sonne on the follow through

[LincsWoldsClaret]

No idea why Sonne was brought on but…
It was a mild challenge and the ref had ignored more serious challenges all night so was clearly looking to give them something or do something dramatic to gain attention.

[boatshed bill]

Unfortunately that is a penalty because Sonne goes to ground.
First one looked like a dive to me.

[Lip]

If that had happened to Burnley,I would be screaming for a penalty.So a clear penalty for me.

[Goalposts]

Not a penalty Sonne slides to block a cross.. cirkin then steps into sonne with the ball already gone..

Soft to say the least and all the commentators on sky said the same thing,

[Ric_C]

The Sunderland player was "clever" by initiating the contact. Probably a 50 50 one for me.

But in the context of the game, where he'd already given a dodgy one for them and refused one for us, plus the fact Sunderland dived around all game, I'd have not given it.

[BurnleyFC]

Really, really weak, but Sonne was daft to dive in.

[Conroy92]

If that was a penalty, so was the foul on Flemming. If the ref had given that, I don't think people would be arguing about the Sonne one.

This for me. More similar than people think.
Sonnes leg makes contact and comes across the path. When you watch the Flemming one there's not much with the upper half which draws the eyes but the defenders knee and leg come across Flemming. There either both penny's or neither. Poor reffing.

[daveisaclaret]

It's not close to a foul.

[Quicknick]

He went down, THEN there was minor contact. No penalty.

[CoolClaret]

Sonne is allowed to maintain his line to try and block a cross.

Their player turned into him and fell down - that is not a penalty, nor is it a free kick anywhere on the pitch.

If Sonne would have angled into him to try and play the ball and caught him then yes, that would have been a penalty.

[quoonbeatz]

Both looked like dives at the ground and the numerous replays I’ve seen don’t do anything to convince otherwise.

The first just looks like he cuts across CJ, kicks his own feet and throws himself down. If there is any contact it’s minimal and it’s caused by the forward running across Cj’s stride - there’s no challenge. That’s not a foul.

The second Sonne slides in to block a potential cross and the player is practically on the floor by the time there’s any contact. That’s not a foul either.

Contact does not equal a foul. Forwards instigating contact is not a foul. Referees have to understand that a player being where they are allowed to be and doing what they are allowed to do, does not equal a foul. If either CJ or Sonne had attempted to play the ball or the man, then that’s a foul. Neither did. Really poor decisions from yet another really poor referee.

[gandhisflipflop]

It’s amazing how people see things differently. I’m not sure how that is not a penalty.

[Hipper]

Both Flemming's and Sonne's penalty incident look the same to me.

Both defenders are trying to block the cross or shot, not make a tackle. The forwards do not get to the ball first to cross or shoot and both decide to go down before any contact is made.

I don't think either was a penalty but they are difficult calls for any referee with all the play acting and no VAR.

[MrTopTier]

Actually have to say that normal real-time angle not a penalty; 1st replay with camera behind goal line on Sonnes back, not a penalty; 2nd replay from touchline with camera on Sunderland players back, definite penalty....no argument. Sonne scythes him down completely.

1st penalty happens so quick that you can excuse the ref for not seeing the exact inch on the ground where the contact was made and he falls yards inside the box so in a way cons the referee. He was clean through in any case and in a real good goal scoring position so the foul was worthy of a penalty.

Can't quite understand the wrath of the ref....if anything his mistake was in not giving a red card because he's booked him to confirm it's a deliberate foul and then not applied the laws of the game by sending him off, which states incompetence.

Only seen the 4 minutes match highlights so can't comment on the rest of his performance.

It’s the double jeopardy rule being applied. Inside the box it’s a booking and a penalty. Outside the box he would have been stopping a goal scoring opportunity and a red card is applicable.

[THEWELLERNUT70]

Their player stands on Sonnes foot after Sonne goes to ground AND THEN goes over

No penalty!

[MrTopTier]

First one outside the box. Whether he clipped is also debatable.
Second one Sonne slides in goes past the ball. Cirkin entangles his leg and goes down.No penalty.
Flemming misses the ball and contact comes after. No penalty.

All in my opinion of course, although had VAR been involved, the game would have still been going!

[jdrobbo]

Not a penalty Sonne slides to block a cross.. cirkin then steps into sonne with the ball already gone..

Soft to say the least and all the commentators on sky said the same thing,

This is correct. Absolutely spot-on. And to add to that, Cirkin’s body Is already falling when his right foot makes impact with Sonne. Then he falls to ground. He’s absolutely playing for a penalty. People are talking about a player trying to drag a ball back… This player is playing for a penalty and you can see that with his deliberate motion to put his right foot into Sonne.

[LincsWoldsClaret]

The co-commentator last night -
“He’s not give a pen for that surely”

[sound and vision]

If that happens outside the box, it would be play on. The two guys in the studio have both played to this level and above and they both thought no pen. I've not seen a refereeing performance like that since Brian Glover in KES. If he could have taken the pens himself he would have!

[It Is What It Is]

You wouldn't be having these good healthy argument debates at all if VAR was used.
VAR has killed all the emotion out of the game in the EPL..
The standard of refereeing has to improve though.

[elwaclaret]

Having watched it back several times… The attacker see’s the defenders already committed and steps across into Sonne’s block. It was what Wolves were doing a couple of years ago placing their legs in the way to make sure there is contact. Not only not a penalty but I’d like to see attackers booked for doing it. On the other hand if it was given for handball, it was just laughable.

[Bin Ont Turf]

Some fans have been brainwashed by the football shite decision religious cult.

Justice.

[Dark Cloud]

I honestly don't think it's a penalty. I wasn't in the best position to judge last night at the Turf, but I've watched it back and I think the attacker is turning back so fast he's actually slipping over anyway. Plus he then inadvertently makes contact with Sonne who gone to ground and can't possibly get out of the way. I genuinely think both missed penalties were "justice done".

[claretspice]

It's arguably a penalty but it's very similar to O'Nien on Flemming in that it's a tangle if legs as the defender goes to make a block and goes to ground. Both are debatable, neither are clear cut, but having not given one I can't see how you then give the other, particularly in the last minute of injury time.

[me01jh]

Both looked like dives at the ground and the numerous replays I’ve seen don’t do anything to convince otherwise.

The first just looks like he cuts across CJ, kicks his own feet and throws himself down. If there is any contact it’s minimal and it’s caused by the forward running across Cj’s stride - there’s no challenge. That’s not a foul.

The second Sonne slides in to block a potential cross and the player is practically on the floor by the time there’s any contact. That’s not a foul either.

Contact does not equal a foul. Forwards instigating contact is not a foul. Referees have to understand that a player being where they are allowed to be and doing what they are allowed to do, does not equal a foul. If either CJ or Sonne had attempted to play the ball or the man, then that’s a foul. Neither did. Really poor decisions from yet another really poor referee.

This is an absolutely fabulous assessment and perfectly articulated. With any experience of the game, neither penalty would have been given. That said, the Sonne penalty is normally reserved for the home team, astonishing to see this given to the away team so late in the game.

[martin_p]

I’d have wanted a penalty for the second one, it’s soft but it’s probably a foul. But it was certainly less of a foul than the one on Fleming.

[Tricky Trevor]

Off thread. The first pen not one person has commented on the lino. Why in hell has he not corrected the ref. He had to be in line with last defender so should have had a perfect view.

[Bosscat]

Off thread. The first pen not one person has commented on the lino. Why in hell has he not corrected the ref. He had to be in line with last defender so should have had a perfect view.

A few on here have ...
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=79563#p2488449https ... 3#p2488441

[quoonbeatz]

Off thread. The first pen not one person has commented on the lino. Why in hell has he not corrected the ref. He had to be in line with last defender so should have had a perfect view.

They only give ins and outs these days and then only on the refs instruction.

[Vino blanco]

I don’t think any of the three penalty incidents were penalties.

[IanMcL]

Not a penalty Sonne slides to block a cross.. cirkin then steps into sonne with the ball already gone..

Soft to say the least and all the commentators on sky said the same thing,

This.

No contact made by Sonne.