I’m not really interested in made up analogies.
Put simply, Kane kicks Dumfries, not the other way around.
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
I’m not really interested in made up analogies.
Put simply, Kane kicks Dumfries, not the other way around.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dumfries' studs, facing up and that high, shouldn't be there to kick.
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
I’m not really interested in made up analogies.
Put simply, Kane kicks Dumfries, not the other way around.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dumfries' studs, facing up and that high, shouldn't be there to kick.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
and the handball by Saka , what ?
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 13 seconds ago
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another debate entirely - I think the rules would state that a foul is a foul no matter what time of the game or where on the pitch it takes place. Be honest, how many times have you seen a left back bringing the ball out, looking up the pitch, booting it long and a striker comes sliding in to try to block it. The left back's foot will be the one 'kicking' the strikers boot, but that doesn't mean it's not a free kick to the full back's team.
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 13 seconds ago
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another debate entirely - I think the rules would state that a foul is a foul no matter what time of the game or where on the pitch it takes place. Be honest, how many times have you seen a left back bringing the ball out, looking up the pitch, booting it long and a striker comes sliding in to try to block it. The left back's foot will be the one 'kicking' the strikers boot, but that doesn't mean it's not a free kick to the full back's team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah fair point.
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 13 seconds ago
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another debate entirely - I think the rules would state that a foul is a foul no matter what time of the game or where on the pitch it takes place. Be honest, how many times have you seen a left back bringing the ball out, looking up the pitch, booting it long and a striker comes sliding in to try to block it. The left back's foot will be the one 'kicking' the strikers boot, but that doesn't mean it's not a free kick to the full back's team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If that happens then doesn't mean it's OK. What is the defender supposed to do? How is he supposed to defend? He tried to block the shot and didn't make contact. Kane kicked him instead.
comment by Peks - Comanche Moon (U6618)
posted 10 minutes ago
and the handball by Saka , what ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If that footage you posted is legit, then it looks very much like a handball and I can only presume it went unnoticed.
comment by Peks - Comanche Moon (U6618)
posted 7 minutes ago
and the handball by Saka , what ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not quite Maradona in 86 is it.
There are always contentious decisions- we had 1 go for us in 66 and then seemed to have to spend decades paying it back - Bobby Moore getting fitted up in South America in 1970, Maradona in 86, Pearce getting headbutted in 88, Rooney being fouled out of the tournament in 2004 and then stitched up by a diving Ronaldo in 2006. We then had our own FA punishing us by hiring Schteve McLaren and Woy boy between 2008-2016 - oh and Sam pint of gravy Allardyce for 1 game.
Basically I couldn’t give a faaaack
Disagree with the decision but that is the sort of luck going for us and Southgate at the moment. Hate seeing those sorts of pens given at the best of times, ones in which players obviously aren't going to score (for Kane his shot was well wide), but then a second and much better chance is given at trying to score via a pen.
Decades ago, we are in the Netherlands shoes and that was the sort of thing that went against us. In this Southgate era we're the ones benefiting.
I want Southgate to pick my lottery numbers, I really do.
comment by Critical Supe Theory (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 13 seconds ago
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another debate entirely - I think the rules would state that a foul is a foul no matter what time of the game or where on the pitch it takes place. Be honest, how many times have you seen a left back bringing the ball out, looking up the pitch, booting it long and a striker comes sliding in to try to block it. The left back's foot will be the one 'kicking' the strikers boot, but that doesn't mean it's not a free kick to the full back's team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If that happens then doesn't mean it's OK. What is the defender supposed to do? How is he supposed to defend? He tried to block the shot and didn't make contact. Kane kicked him instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Going in with your studs at knee height is reckless. Anywhere else it is a free kick. It was the right decision
Not sure what I’m missing here but all I can see is Kane kicking Dumphries on the follow through, not the other way around.
The shot was gone too, the defender gained no advantage, just simple football stuff.
Honestly can’t see why people are saying Kane was kicked, when it’s his foot moving towards Dumphries after hitting the ball.
Nvm, I’ll take it.
————-
I am 100% with your assessment, i really don’t thin k Dumfries does anything wrong, his foot doesn’t move towards Kane, in fact Kane kicks him.
Sorry you’re never going to convince me it was a penalty.
Just don’t go crying if the same decision goes against us.
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but the biggest controversy is not the decision itself, it's the fact that it was reviewed by VAR.
It wasn't a clear and obvious error - not a chance.
It was also a case of the referee being unduly influenced by watching replays of the incident - totally distorting what actually happened, and focusing on the position of the foot.
Another great example of the major problems that VAR has brought to the game.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but the biggest controversy is not the decision itself, it's the fact that it was reviewed by VAR.
It wasn't a clear and obvious error - not a chance.
It was also a case of the referee being unduly influenced by watching replays of the incident - totally distorting what actually happened, and focusing on the position of the foot.
Another great example of the major problems that VAR has brought to the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know how hurt Kane was by the contact. He seemed totally fine taking the pen a couple of minutes later. But if he'd been up quite soon after that contact and not looking like he was in agonising pain on the floor for a minute, I'm not sure it would have even gone to VAR at all. This is where I think the reactions of players can have an influence still.
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 26 minutes ago
Not sure what I’m missing here but all I can see is Kane kicking Dumphries on the follow through, not the other way around.
The shot was gone too, the defender gained no advantage, just simple football stuff.
Honestly can’t see why people are saying Kane was kicked, when it’s his foot moving towards Dumphries after hitting the ball.
Nvm, I’ll take it.
————-
I am 100% with your assessment, i really don’t thin k Dumfries does anything wrong, his foot doesn’t move towards Kane, in fact Kane kicks him.
Sorry you’re never going to convince me it was a penalty.
Just don’t go crying if the same decision goes against us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
His foot doesn't move towards Kane? You need glasses mate. His foot is blatantly moving towards Kane. Have a look from 1:18 onwards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOU2xzJiXNU
Both players legs/feet are moving towards the ball/each other. The difference is that Dumfries has lead with his studs showing. If you go in at knee height with your studs showing then you are asking for trouble. Anywhere else on the pitch and that is a freekick and a yellow card. No question about it.
I think it is quite telling that Dumfries took his booking without question.
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but the biggest controversy is not the decision itself, it's the fact that it was reviewed by VAR.
It wasn't a clear and obvious error - not a chance.
It was also a case of the referee being unduly influenced by watching replays of the incident - totally distorting what actually happened, and focusing on the position of the foot.
Another great example of the major problems that VAR has brought to the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know how hurt Kane was by the contact. He seemed totally fine taking the pen a couple of minutes later. But if he'd been up quite soon after that contact and not looking like he was in agonising pain on the floor for a minute, I'm not sure it would have even gone to VAR at all. This is where I think the reactions of players can have an influence still.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good point and yes, that is very possible.
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules... (U6374)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 28 minutes ago
Tbh I felt the defender was entitled to try and block the shot and Kane actually kicked him on the follow through, so no penalty for me.
—-
100% correct, never for a minute did i think it would be given. Even when the ref went to the monitor he had the chance to say ‘no’, but decided to give it, I’ll take the luck, but for me no way should that be given as a penalty. We would have been as outraged as Koeman was, had it happened at the other end.
Fingers crossed our luck holds against the Spanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The honesty of a challenge is irrelevant. Yes he's entitled to go for it, but did he get it? was his foot high? Was he stretching? Were his studs up?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kane? Yep.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kane caught the ball sweetly with the top of his foot. If he had got there second the impact would have been his foot on Dumfries, not his studs.
Therein lies the important difference.
I
If this were the other way around, Dumfries clearing the ball and following through on to Kanes knee high studs up lunge at the ball them it's a free kick and probably never gets mentioned again.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
If this were the other way around, Dumfries clearing the ball and following through on to Kanes knee high studs up lunge at the ball them it's a free kick and probably never gets mentioned again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 5 minutes ago
If this were the other way around, Dumfries clearing the ball and following through on to Kanes knee high studs up lunge at the ball them it's a free kick and probably never gets mentioned again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
100%.
People seem to think fouls are different when in the box.
The whole point is Dumfries doesn’t kick Kane, Kane kicks Dumfries, its nothing more than a coming together, Dumfries doesn’t at any point move towards Kane, it is Kanes forward momentum that causes the contact, therefore not a foul by Dumfries.
Never a penalty.
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 7 minutes ago
The whole point is Dumfries doesn’t kick Kane, Kane kicks Dumfries, its nothing more than a coming together, Dumfries doesn’t at any point move towards Kane, it is Kanes forward momentum that causes the contact, therefore not a foul by Dumfries.
Never a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolute nonsense. Watch the video in the link below from 1 min 18 secs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOU2xzJiXNU
Kane actually has his left foot planted to take the shot at the point of impact. Dumfries' foot, and indeed his whole body, is moving towards Kane and an attempt to block the shot. If you go in at knee height with your studs showing then you are asking for trouble.
Watch Dumfries' reaction. He immediately turns to look at the ref after the contact because he knows he might be in trouble. He also accepted the decision and his booking without any fuss. Just a little nod of his head to the ref. He knew he had messed up.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 37 minutes ago
If this were the other way around, Dumfries clearing the ball and following through on to Kanes knee high studs up lunge at the ball them it's a free kick and probably never gets mentioned again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't see how anyone would disagree with this. I think some people are confusing two arguments, whether it was a foul vs whether it was 'worth' a penalty. A foul is a foul wherever it is, where it happens determines the outcome. Same reason a handball on the halfway line to block a counter is a yellow and a handball on the goal line is a red.
Sign in if you want to comment
The Penalty
Page 3 of 4
posted on 11/7/24
I’m not really interested in made up analogies.
Put simply, Kane kicks Dumfries, not the other way around.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
I’m not really interested in made up analogies.
Put simply, Kane kicks Dumfries, not the other way around.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dumfries' studs, facing up and that high, shouldn't be there to kick.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
I’m not really interested in made up analogies.
Put simply, Kane kicks Dumfries, not the other way around.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dumfries' studs, facing up and that high, shouldn't be there to kick.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
posted on 11/7/24
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
posted on 11/7/24
and the handball by Saka , what ?
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 13 seconds ago
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another debate entirely - I think the rules would state that a foul is a foul no matter what time of the game or where on the pitch it takes place. Be honest, how many times have you seen a left back bringing the ball out, looking up the pitch, booting it long and a striker comes sliding in to try to block it. The left back's foot will be the one 'kicking' the strikers boot, but that doesn't mean it's not a free kick to the full back's team.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 13 seconds ago
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another debate entirely - I think the rules would state that a foul is a foul no matter what time of the game or where on the pitch it takes place. Be honest, how many times have you seen a left back bringing the ball out, looking up the pitch, booting it long and a striker comes sliding in to try to block it. The left back's foot will be the one 'kicking' the strikers boot, but that doesn't mean it's not a free kick to the full back's team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah fair point.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 13 seconds ago
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another debate entirely - I think the rules would state that a foul is a foul no matter what time of the game or where on the pitch it takes place. Be honest, how many times have you seen a left back bringing the ball out, looking up the pitch, booting it long and a striker comes sliding in to try to block it. The left back's foot will be the one 'kicking' the strikers boot, but that doesn't mean it's not a free kick to the full back's team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If that happens then doesn't mean it's OK. What is the defender supposed to do? How is he supposed to defend? He tried to block the shot and didn't make contact. Kane kicked him instead.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Peks - Comanche Moon (U6618)
posted 10 minutes ago
and the handball by Saka , what ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If that footage you posted is legit, then it looks very much like a handball and I can only presume it went unnoticed.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Peks - Comanche Moon (U6618)
posted 7 minutes ago
and the handball by Saka , what ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not quite Maradona in 86 is it.
There are always contentious decisions- we had 1 go for us in 66 and then seemed to have to spend decades paying it back - Bobby Moore getting fitted up in South America in 1970, Maradona in 86, Pearce getting headbutted in 88, Rooney being fouled out of the tournament in 2004 and then stitched up by a diving Ronaldo in 2006. We then had our own FA punishing us by hiring Schteve McLaren and Woy boy between 2008-2016 - oh and Sam pint of gravy Allardyce for 1 game.
Basically I couldn’t give a faaaack
posted on 11/7/24
saka handballed
posted on 11/7/24
Disagree with the decision but that is the sort of luck going for us and Southgate at the moment. Hate seeing those sorts of pens given at the best of times, ones in which players obviously aren't going to score (for Kane his shot was well wide), but then a second and much better chance is given at trying to score via a pen.
Decades ago, we are in the Netherlands shoes and that was the sort of thing that went against us. In this Southgate era we're the ones benefiting.
I want Southgate to pick my lottery numbers, I really do.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Critical Supe Theory (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules and if I can’t I’ll sue you (U6374)
posted 13 seconds ago
Think someone said earlier that it’s a penalty all day long in Germany, like every time.
Maybe I’m just getting old but I think the threshold for being a penalty should be very high indeed, and the defender should have to gain a significant advantage unless serious foul play.
I don’t see any of that here. Just a defender trying to block a shot and Kane kicking him on his follow through.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d take five of those in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's another debate entirely - I think the rules would state that a foul is a foul no matter what time of the game or where on the pitch it takes place. Be honest, how many times have you seen a left back bringing the ball out, looking up the pitch, booting it long and a striker comes sliding in to try to block it. The left back's foot will be the one 'kicking' the strikers boot, but that doesn't mean it's not a free kick to the full back's team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If that happens then doesn't mean it's OK. What is the defender supposed to do? How is he supposed to defend? He tried to block the shot and didn't make contact. Kane kicked him instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Going in with your studs at knee height is reckless. Anywhere else it is a free kick. It was the right decision
posted on 11/7/24
Not sure what I’m missing here but all I can see is Kane kicking Dumphries on the follow through, not the other way around.
The shot was gone too, the defender gained no advantage, just simple football stuff.
Honestly can’t see why people are saying Kane was kicked, when it’s his foot moving towards Dumphries after hitting the ball.
Nvm, I’ll take it.
————-
I am 100% with your assessment, i really don’t thin k Dumfries does anything wrong, his foot doesn’t move towards Kane, in fact Kane kicks him.
Sorry you’re never going to convince me it was a penalty.
Just don’t go crying if the same decision goes against us.
posted on 11/7/24
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but the biggest controversy is not the decision itself, it's the fact that it was reviewed by VAR.
It wasn't a clear and obvious error - not a chance.
It was also a case of the referee being unduly influenced by watching replays of the incident - totally distorting what actually happened, and focusing on the position of the foot.
Another great example of the major problems that VAR has brought to the game.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but the biggest controversy is not the decision itself, it's the fact that it was reviewed by VAR.
It wasn't a clear and obvious error - not a chance.
It was also a case of the referee being unduly influenced by watching replays of the incident - totally distorting what actually happened, and focusing on the position of the foot.
Another great example of the major problems that VAR has brought to the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know how hurt Kane was by the contact. He seemed totally fine taking the pen a couple of minutes later. But if he'd been up quite soon after that contact and not looking like he was in agonising pain on the floor for a minute, I'm not sure it would have even gone to VAR at all. This is where I think the reactions of players can have an influence still.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 26 minutes ago
Not sure what I’m missing here but all I can see is Kane kicking Dumphries on the follow through, not the other way around.
The shot was gone too, the defender gained no advantage, just simple football stuff.
Honestly can’t see why people are saying Kane was kicked, when it’s his foot moving towards Dumphries after hitting the ball.
Nvm, I’ll take it.
————-
I am 100% with your assessment, i really don’t thin k Dumfries does anything wrong, his foot doesn’t move towards Kane, in fact Kane kicks him.
Sorry you’re never going to convince me it was a penalty.
Just don’t go crying if the same decision goes against us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
His foot doesn't move towards Kane? You need glasses mate. His foot is blatantly moving towards Kane. Have a look from 1:18 onwards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOU2xzJiXNU
Both players legs/feet are moving towards the ball/each other. The difference is that Dumfries has lead with his studs showing. If you go in at knee height with your studs showing then you are asking for trouble. Anywhere else on the pitch and that is a freekick and a yellow card. No question about it.
I think it is quite telling that Dumfries took his booking without question.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but the biggest controversy is not the decision itself, it's the fact that it was reviewed by VAR.
It wasn't a clear and obvious error - not a chance.
It was also a case of the referee being unduly influenced by watching replays of the incident - totally distorting what actually happened, and focusing on the position of the foot.
Another great example of the major problems that VAR has brought to the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know how hurt Kane was by the contact. He seemed totally fine taking the pen a couple of minutes later. But if he'd been up quite soon after that contact and not looking like he was in agonising pain on the floor for a minute, I'm not sure it would have even gone to VAR at all. This is where I think the reactions of players can have an influence still.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good point and yes, that is very possible.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules... (U6374)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 28 minutes ago
Tbh I felt the defender was entitled to try and block the shot and Kane actually kicked him on the follow through, so no penalty for me.
—-
100% correct, never for a minute did i think it would be given. Even when the ref went to the monitor he had the chance to say ‘no’, but decided to give it, I’ll take the luck, but for me no way should that be given as a penalty. We would have been as outraged as Koeman was, had it happened at the other end.
Fingers crossed our luck holds against the Spanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The honesty of a challenge is irrelevant. Yes he's entitled to go for it, but did he get it? was his foot high? Was he stretching? Were his studs up?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kane? Yep.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kane caught the ball sweetly with the top of his foot. If he had got there second the impact would have been his foot on Dumfries, not his studs.
Therein lies the important difference.
I
posted on 11/7/24
If this were the other way around, Dumfries clearing the ball and following through on to Kanes knee high studs up lunge at the ball them it's a free kick and probably never gets mentioned again.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
If this were the other way around, Dumfries clearing the ball and following through on to Kanes knee high studs up lunge at the ball them it's a free kick and probably never gets mentioned again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 5 minutes ago
If this were the other way around, Dumfries clearing the ball and following through on to Kanes knee high studs up lunge at the ball them it's a free kick and probably never gets mentioned again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
100%.
People seem to think fouls are different when in the box.
posted on 11/7/24
The whole point is Dumfries doesn’t kick Kane, Kane kicks Dumfries, its nothing more than a coming together, Dumfries doesn’t at any point move towards Kane, it is Kanes forward momentum that causes the contact, therefore not a foul by Dumfries.
Never a penalty.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 7 minutes ago
The whole point is Dumfries doesn’t kick Kane, Kane kicks Dumfries, its nothing more than a coming together, Dumfries doesn’t at any point move towards Kane, it is Kanes forward momentum that causes the contact, therefore not a foul by Dumfries.
Never a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolute nonsense. Watch the video in the link below from 1 min 18 secs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOU2xzJiXNU
Kane actually has his left foot planted to take the shot at the point of impact. Dumfries' foot, and indeed his whole body, is moving towards Kane and an attempt to block the shot. If you go in at knee height with your studs showing then you are asking for trouble.
Watch Dumfries' reaction. He immediately turns to look at the ref after the contact because he knows he might be in trouble. He also accepted the decision and his booking without any fuss. Just a little nod of his head to the ref. He knew he had messed up.
posted on 11/7/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 37 minutes ago
If this were the other way around, Dumfries clearing the ball and following through on to Kanes knee high studs up lunge at the ball them it's a free kick and probably never gets mentioned again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't see how anyone would disagree with this. I think some people are confusing two arguments, whether it was a foul vs whether it was 'worth' a penalty. A foul is a foul wherever it is, where it happens determines the outcome. Same reason a handball on the halfway line to block a counter is a yellow and a handball on the goal line is a red.
Page 3 of 4