SUTTON v MAIDSTONE

[jr]

The arm was outstretched when the ball hit him.

[DaveF]

Yes, downwards alongside his body !! And he was turning away.

[Nick the Greek/The Speshul One]

I actually agree with jr. It is a penalty. His arm stopped a clean strike on target, that to me should mean a penalty

[os]

Feb 15, 2009 21:19:19 GMT Nick the Greek/The Speshul One said:

I actually agree with jr. It is a penalty. His arm stopped a clean strike on target, that to me should mean a penalty

I disagree as pure logic suggests you cannot give penalties for balls blasted at defenders, we have all seen the attacker try this and if we go that way it would be chaos. There has to be be some movement towards the ball in my view?

We all shout for them as you get the occasional one given but they should not be, we had a similar one go against us at home to Newport a couple of seasons ago.

[jr]

The shot was on target and it didn't hit him at point blank range. To me it's a fairly straight forward decision and you would be complaining if it wasn't given if we were the attacking team

[Amber Aleman]

For what it's worth, the ref told Paul Doswell after the game that he had doubts about the penalty decision. (See the manager's comments on the official site.)

[DaveF]

Actually, no I wouldn't !
OK, in common with everyone else I'd probably shout instinctively for a penalty but then be sanguine about it not being awarded. It's not an automatic offence when the hand or arm comes into contact with the ball and you rarely see that sort of incident result in a penalty nowadays, it's one of the few modern trends in refereeing that is right.
But, JR, perhaps it's just my view as a sometimes competent defender compared to yours as a run of the mill forward
But as someone else said, we've had a couple of dodgy pens go our way this season so things do tend to even out. It's just annoying that Maidstone were never in the game until then and that decision changed everything.

[os]

Feb 15, 2009 22:15:13 GMT Amber Aleman said:

For what it's worth, the ref told Paul Doswell after the game that he had doubts about the penalty decision. (See the manager's comments on the official site.)

I think that's the answer, the referee had doubts therefore under the rules of the game it was not a penalty as he has to be certain and by his own admission has made an error!

[Rupert Scallywag]

Having seen the video - I reckon its a pen. Understand both points of view but would be screaming if it was our shout

[taz]

TBH, whilst not point blank, the ball is hammered at Tim from close range and he genuinely trying to get his arm out of the way. It's not like he did a John Terry and dived across arms outstretched to block the shot was it?

The fact that the ref admitted afterwards that he had 'doubts', yet still gave the fecking thing says all you need to know about officials at this level. Pretty much summed up his second half 'performance'.

As for our performance. Very good overall. The first goal in particular was an excellent move and finish. Didn't think they deserved anything from the game, as they offered very little over the 90 mins, but again we pay the price for not putting a side away.

I'm actually more disappointed we've lost AJ again for at least a few weeks than the result. It'll certainly have more of a long term impact on our play-off hopes.

And as for the pitch, yes it's sh*t. But unlike Man United, we don't have 100k to relay it in the next week and it's not miraculously going to get better, so I suggest we just get on with it.

[billy]

Feb 16, 2009 9:47:30 GMT Rupert Scallywag said:

Having seen the video - I reckon its a pen. Understand both points of view but would be screaming if it was our shout

Spot on.It makes me laugh.For 100 years handball was a penalty - end of story.Nowadays defenders spread their arms out John Terry style as someone else said and when it hits them they say they didn't mean it.