Time for video review of penalty decisions!!

[Stonigut]

That was no penalty, atrocious decision, these guys would fall if a mosquito got near them, was an exciting game but to end like that reeks of injustice!!!!

[Rockman]

You have to round up the usual suspects,in this case there is only one.
It has to be Fergie!

[Peter R]

Running at pace, a slight clip will bring you down. The replay clearly showed the contact on his foot.. stupid (attempt to) tackle by the defender. Penalty deserved!

[Stonigut]

I think that's the issue, nowadays, slight contact is not an obstruction, he saw the ball beyond his grasp got a slight touch, giod excuse to flop and went down, football turning into basketball now, I just cannot watch this type of foolishness coming into the game!! You know I am more pool than palace so no sentiment biz here.

[Peter R]

I actually think there was enough there to warrant the penalty. Blatant diving is a different thing.

[Stonigut]

Really!!!! just like the handball issue there must be either clear intent to obstruct or the action actually obstructed a goal.

[Peter R]

Really!!!! just like the handball issue there must be either clear intent to obstruct or the action actually obstructed a goal.

Really!!!! I thought any foul (handball aside) committed in the box would warrant a penalty. I don't think "intent to obstruct" comes into it at all. That said, bringing the man down, however soft you might consider it, would be liable to be penalised.

[Sir X]

Peter is right,running full speed chasing a man with the intent to obstruct,be prepared for the consequences when the obstruction occurs and you fail to touch the ball or obstruct the ball,or you clip the man while obstructing the ball from its destination.

He obstructed the man,Penalty.

[Stonigut]

So a touch is now equal to a foul, I see plenty of rough housing in the penalty box that are not called, that was the merest of touches, I still don't even really see it even in slowmo, maybe the refs have a boot microphone detector!!!!

[Stonigut]

Bwoy I hear you, is pure coward play ball nowadays, some of the stuff I see some man deserve a hard thump in the nose for some if them foolishness.

[Sir X]

Yuh good,yuh try running at full speed and I am chasing you with the intent to obstruct the ball ,but instead I get your heel,a hope yuh stand up.

[Paul Marin]

Stoni - stick to the laws of the game, Law 12.1:

Direct free kick group of 4
- tackles an opponent to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the opponent before touching the ball
-etc.
For this group of 4 direct free kick fouls, the referee is concerned only with whether the action occured not with how it was done." Intent isn't a factor.

[Peter R]

Stoni, with all due respect, if you didn't see the touch in the slo mo, you should get your eyes tested. And you're correct about the rough housing etc. which you see plenty of on corner kicks and with players lining up in a wall for example. However, when a player is ahead of a defender and running at the goal, all that is needed is a mere touch to impede his progress.

[Paul Marin]

Stoni, with all due respect, if you didn't see the touch in the slo mo, you should get your eyes tested. And you're correct about the rough housing etc. which you see plenty of on corner kicks and with players lining up in a wall for example. However, when a player is ahead of a defender and running at the goal, all that is needed is a mere touch to impede his progress.

Stoni - if you go back to your high school physics, the equation I believe that is relevant is F = MV^2 (force = mass * velocity squared). The force of a "mere touch" at speed is far greater than a "mere touch" at a slow pace. Easy penalty.

[Mosiah]

I don't know which game you were watching, so I can't agree or disagree.

But what I do know is that the foul against Benteke was certainly a foul and a penalty. Moreover, despite the nonsense spoken by the American panelist, Benteke did not try to make the most of it. Clearly, he is not a former player because any former player would realise that such a clip can send a player sprawling.

Indeed, it was a similar clip during a little scrimmage game in Long Island several years ago that resulted in me tearing my meniscus and having to have artho surgery. I guess this guy would accuse me of faking my injury from such a slight nick.

PENALTY!!!

So Stoni, were you referring to the Arsenal game? Because Coquelin, imo, did not foul Harry Kane. Kane, dragged his feet into the sliding player. Indeed, it was Kane who made contact with Coquelin and not the other way around. Kane could have kept on running and the natural running motion would have sent him clear of the Arsenal's player's legs.

So, yes, Stoni, I agree with you that that was not a foul. But you are wrong that a penalty was given as it was not in the area.