Would You Give A Penalty?

[dblair]

I agree mate but the consensus on Match of the Day tonight was that a penalty should not be awarded if a player goes down before contact happens. In my opinion, if the defender commits the foul, it's acceptable for the attacker to go down to make the referee's job easier.

How can it be deemed a foul if there has been no contact?

Were they discussing the west brom player (mcmanaman I think) did you hear tony pulis's reaction? If only everyone in the game had as much integrity as that man. Hats of to him.

[Cobra]

How can it be deemed a foul if there has been no contact?

Were they discussing the west brom player (mcmanaman I think) did you hear tony pulis's reaction? If only everyone in the game had as much integrity as that man. Hats of to him.

If a defender mistimes a challenge and commits a foul, it shouldn't matter whether the attacker makes the most of it or not.

The problem we often have is that officials will often only penalise for a blatant foul, which means attackers are encouraged to make the most of challenges to get the fouls they should get anyway.

[Guest]

Cobra the defender never committed a foul. He slid in and missed the ball and never touched the player.

The boy dived and to me should be sent off

[Boba Fett]

If there's no contact there's no foul. Presuming I (as the referee) was confident with that and had a good view then the attacker would be booked for simulation and a free kick awarded to the defending team.

Any talk of an attacker going down to make the refs job easier or anticipating a foul is what's ruining the game IMO.

No contact = No foul.

[chomp my root]

If there's no contact there's no foul. Presuming I (as the referee) was confident with that and had a good view then the attacker would be booked for simulation and a free kick awarded to the defending team.

Any talk of an attacker going down to make the refs job easier or anticipating a foul is what's ruining the game IMO.

No contact = No foul.

This is why I'd like to see the Ref's being able to retrospectively dish out/retract cards. Let them watch the footage, especially in the big games there will be loads of different camera angles. Make the managers make their players stop cheating. If players are going to be called over their cheating and miss games then hopefully all the diving will stop. If the top level players stop doing it it should filter down through the leagues, including kids. 

[Bloomogg]

If there's no contact there's no foul. Presuming I (as the referee) was confident with that and had a good view then the attacker would be booked for simulation and a free kick awarded to the defending team.

Any talk of an attacker going down to make the refs job easier or anticipating a foul is what's ruining the game IMO.

No contact = No foul.

Doesn't always have to be contact for a foul.

[Boba Fett]

Doesn't always have to be contact for a foul.

It should be exactly that is my point.

[Bloomogg]

It should be exactly that is my point.

You going to drop reckless play with no contact?

[deefly78]

If a player can stay on there feet then they should, I hate cheats n divers and people that go down when scripted. Man up ffs. The majority of footballers these days are complete wimps

[Boba Fett]

You going to drop reckless play with no contact?

Yup.. All except high feet.

The laws of the game are already ambiguous enough without ref's being put in a position of having to decide "that could have been a foul if there was contact" No excuses, no grey areas - there's either illegal contact (whole new debate on what's legal or not) or there no contact. If a player collapses to to ground without being touched its cheating in my book.

[Bloomogg]

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf

[CW 90+3 02/05/16]

Anyone see the Griffiths penalty Considine yellow card incident there on Sportscene?

Absolutely incredible that a straight red card wasn't given to Considine.