AFC Bournemouth v Manchester United - Saturday 5.30 pm

billythekid said:

Interesting it was for a trip and also Gallagher said there should be more transparency for those watching in the stadium for why a decision was made.​

​

Click to expand...
As much as I was baying for a penalty on the day, I can see the logic of the injury time penalty/freekick decision.

I haven't seen a replay of the earlier Christie collision in the box, for which he got booked for diving. In real time, that looked like a penalty, albeit that Christie was looking for the contact.

On consistency, Kerkez went over in the first half looking for a penalty when there was no contact at all and yet he wasn't booked. How does that work?

In the stadium, I was adamant that Solanke was fouled in the build up to the first United goal Having seen the replay, it was a good tackle and the sort that 10 years ago, no one would have batted an eyelid at. These days, sometimes you see them given and sometimes you don't. I can give the ref a pass on that one, begrudgingly.

The worst of the lot for me is the penalty against Smith. If that truly is a handball according to the laws of the game, then the law is an ass. The ball was travelling at speed, took a massive deflection, and all Smith really did was open his chest to turn as the ball went in a different direction to the one in which he was running.

I heard a few of the pundits saying that his arm moved and followed the ball but, if it did, it was minimal. When the ball hit, Smithy's arm was still very close to his side - it really wasn't making him bigger or in an unnatural position (they're probably terms from the 'old' version of the law, as they seem to change it nearly every season these days).
 
TLDR of the stats.

Opta xG of AFCB 1.64 Man Utd 1.26. If the debatable penalty calls had been reversed this would have been 2.33 vs 0.47.

High positioning on the left side – all of Sinisterra, Kerkez and Kelly had average positions in the Man Utd half.

Kerkez have the most touches in the penalty area with 7 and had the highest xG (0.63).
 
robber button said:
I haven't seen a replay of the earlier Christie collision in the box, for which he got booked for diving. In real time, that looked like a penalty, albeit that Christie was looking for the contact.

On consistency, Kerkez went over in the first half looking for a penalty when there was no contact at all and yet he wasn't booked. How does that work?
Click to expand...
The incident that got Christie a yellow, there was contact but Christie was "looking for it". I don't think the contact would rise to the level of a pen, but I also don't think Christie should have been booked.
 
USCherry said:
The incident that got Christie a yellow, there was contact but Christie was "looking for it". I don't think the contact would rise to the level of a pen, but I also don't think Christie should have been booked.
Click to expand...
This was my reading of that one.
Especially consider Manioo and Hoijlund dives / soft falls that were treated by Harrington in exactly this way. Double standards.
 
As mentioned previously, I tend not to comment too soon after a game and leave it to Monday to allow a resettling of emotions. First, I thought we played very well throughout and should have won and won by a good margin. I don't think any player let us down and while Dango seems to pick-up criticism easily I didn't think he had a bad game, but he did miss a good chance, as did a couple of other players. There were a couple of other occasions where Dango got himself clear in the box but wasn't noticed and the pass never came. There were lots of very good performances, so I've avoid picking anyone else out. From reading this thread I don't see anyone else picking out what I thought was a poorly conceded first goal. The deflected ball was in the air for a while before Fernandes smacked it into the net. I'm probably being over critical on that but having watched it a few times, it's hard not to see it that way. The penalty decision again Smith was particularly harsh but you could see immediately on his face that the ref would give it. I guess years of PL experience told him that would be the case. Like many on here, I thought it was a clear penalty against Christie. It wasn't the trip that stopped him surging into the box but the clear arm across him and the second defender coming across to finish unbalancing Christie. I don't think VAR was looking at that as he was so keen on the trip alone. I've never been a fan of VAR as I felt from the first that referees, knowing they had that backing, wouldn't make the decisions they should. The second part of VAR that I truly dislike is the continually changing and inconsistent penalty-handball rules. We seem to keep changing the rules for VAR and not the other way around that VAR is there to support the rules. It really is becoming difficult to know what constitutes a foul in the box is. I get tired of pundits saying, "not enough contact for me," when it is a foul that would be given anywhere else on the pitch. When is enough, enough? Where is the border? The Everton game was a clear indication of this confusion. We were very lucky for us not to concede a penalty but at the same time, an Everton defender was all over Adams (yeah, he actually played for us) and pushed him to the ground which should have been a penalty. Anywhere outside the box that would have been called a foul. Anyway, a pity that five points have slipped from our grasp over the past two games which if taken, would have had us in an excellent position to challenge for a European place (although not sure we're ready for that). Easy game on Sunday at Villa so looking for three points. :)
 
robber button said:
As much as I was baying for a penalty on the day, I can see the logic of the injury time penalty/freekick decision.

I haven't seen a replay of the earlier Christie collision in the box, for which he got booked for diving. In real time, that looked like a penalty, albeit that Christie was looking for the contact.

On consistency, Kerkez went over in the first half looking for a penalty when there was no contact at all and yet he wasn't booked. How does that work?

In the stadium, I was adamant that Solanke was fouled in the build up to the first United goal Having seen the replay, it was a good tackle and the sort that 10 years ago, no one would have batted an eyelid at. These days, sometimes you see them given and sometimes you don't. I can give the ref a pass on that one, begrudgingly.

The worst of the lot for me is the penalty against Smith. If that truly is a handball according to the laws of the game, then the law is an ass. The ball was travelling at speed, took a massive deflection, and all Smith really did was open his chest to turn as the ball went in a different direction to the one in which he was running.

I heard a few of the pundits saying that his arm moved and followed the ball but, if it did, it was minimal. When the ball hit, Smithy's arm was still very close to his side - it really wasn't making him bigger or in an unnatural position (they're probably terms from the 'old' version of the law, as they seem to change it nearly every season these days).
Click to expand...
Agree . Smith moved his arm towards himself and not the ball if anything. There was no way it as an intentional handball or his arm was in an unnatural position. With the Penalty to us, I think the tackle was outside the box, but had it been awarded to United VaR wouldn't have overturned it. That's the problem. The way they are picking and chosing what to overturn in order to get the results they want. Totally corrupt. I wonder if any crimes are being committed. Hard to prove, but it is corruption.
 
Just seen Ashley Young handball in the area, continuing ref inconsistency with the PGMOL justification adjusted to fit the refs decision
 
Great pen......that came about from Senesi winning the ball in a dangerous area yet again.....oh and a bit of wizardry from Kerkez the winger!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;