Quote from: ChicagoLion on November 21, 2020, 05:14:55 PMTrez could have stayed on his feet and tried to play the ball, he was looking for the penalty, he dived, the touch on his leg did not impede Trez from playing the ball.Yes we have seen them given for a lot less but I do not think it was a penalty.Tend to agree with this. If an opposition player were to do the same you’d be furious. Gutted it wasn’t given but it was one of those decisions that really could have gone either way, today it didn’t go in our way.
Trez could have stayed on his feet and tried to play the ball, he was looking for the penalty, he dived, the touch on his leg did not impede Trez from playing the ball.Yes we have seen them given for a lot less but I do not think it was a penalty.
Quote from: ChicagoLion on November 21, 2020, 05:18:48 PMQuote from: ktvillan on November 21, 2020, 05:16:12 PMQuote from: TonyD on November 21, 2020, 05:12:06 PMI thought the pen looked iffy and could be argued either way.Do you think we would have got away with it? I've seen plenty of yellow and red cards given this season where the player's got a touch on the ball but followed through to foul the opponent. The analysis always says getting touch on the ball is irrelevant if you follow through and foul the player. But did the contact impede Trez? Getting a touch and then mowing down the player is one thing, contact having played the ball is another thing entirely.Do you honestly believe he played the ball, in that he saw Trez knock it away from him and deliberately let it lightly brush his heel? Aside from that, yes he did impede him, Trez made the most of it but there was clear contact to his shin.
Quote from: ktvillan on November 21, 2020, 05:16:12 PMQuote from: TonyD on November 21, 2020, 05:12:06 PMI thought the pen looked iffy and could be argued either way.Do you think we would have got away with it? I've seen plenty of yellow and red cards given this season where the player's got a touch on the ball but followed through to foul the opponent. The analysis always says getting touch on the ball is irrelevant if you follow through and foul the player. But did the contact impede Trez? Getting a touch and then mowing down the player is one thing, contact having played the ball is another thing entirely.
Quote from: TonyD on November 21, 2020, 05:12:06 PMI thought the pen looked iffy and could be argued either way.Do you think we would have got away with it? I've seen plenty of yellow and red cards given this season where the player's got a touch on the ball but followed through to foul the opponent. The analysis always says getting touch on the ball is irrelevant if you follow through and foul the player.
I thought the pen looked iffy and could be argued either way.
How on earth that wasn’t a penalty is beyond me. Trez made a meal of it but it was a foul end of story. I don’t think theirs was a sending off though. Good game to watch for the neutral I guess but so disappointing in the end for us. The games are just impossible to predict at the moment. Brighton are a decent side though and play some nice stuff.
Quote from: ChicagoLion on November 21, 2020, 05:05:25 PMI can see why the penalty wasn’t givenBecause Michael Oliver is a twat?
I can see why the penalty wasn’t given
Also, March just admitted on his interview on BBC that his heart was in his mouth with the penalty which suggests he was surprised it was overturned.
Quote from: Dave on November 21, 2020, 05:06:54 PMQuote from: ChicagoLion on November 21, 2020, 05:05:25 PMI can see why the penalty wasn’t givenBecause Michael Oliver is a twat?The only explanation. If his interpretation was applied consistently players would be allowed to just kick the ball and then quickly punch attackers on the nose.
Lamptey is a bit like wolves’ Traore.All fart and no shit.
Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.
Author
Topic: Aston Villa vs Brighton post-match thread (Read 21117 times)
