Will Wilf be charged?

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Will Wilf be charged?

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 10 Dec 17 10.45pm
Originally posted by Charlie Croker Regardless of your supposedly knowledge, or your 'in' with referees, the officials had a shocker yesterday. The lino in front of the main stand was out of his depth and Kevin Friend lost it early in the game. He is the new Clattenburg. You are entitled to your view. I am entitled to mine. The topic is about whether Wilf will face any action in relation to the penalty awards not about the general standard of the officials on Saturday.Let's keep the debate on track. Edited by Willo (10 Dec 2017 10.48pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

Willo

South coast - west of Brighton. 10 Dec 17 10.45pm

Originally posted by Charlie Croker

Regardless of your supposedly knowledge, or your 'in' with referees, the officials had a shocker yesterday. The lino in front of the main stand was out of his depth and Kevin Friend lost it early in the game. He is the new Clattenburg.

You are entitled to your view.
I am entitled to mine.

The topic is about whether Wilf will face any action in relation to the penalty awards not about the general standard of the officials on Saturday.Let's keep the debate on track.

Edited by Willo (10 Dec 2017 10.48pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Lyons550 Shirley 11 Dec 17 8.31am
Originally posted by Goal Machine For the first it did look as though he was on his way down before he caught the keeper so certainly some controversy. However, no one seem to draw attention to Nathan Ake clipping his calf’s half a second before, I think he had the right to go down from that contact. The second look likes the defender caught Wilfs foot just before the foul so good decision in my opinion. About time Wilf started to get of these penalty decisions in his favour. There isn’t a more dangerous dribbler than him in the Premier League No one 'has a right to go down'...that's simply blatant cheating to gain an advantage. However I do agree that he was clipped by Ake just beforehand which sent him down. The sooner everyone stops seeing it as a 'right to go down' and ref's give fouls on an equal basis both in and outside of the box the better. The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World
Alert a moderator to this post

Lyons550

Shirley 11 Dec 17 8.31am

Originally posted by Goal Machine

For the first it did look as though he was on his way down before he caught the keeper so certainly some controversy. However, no one seem to draw attention to Nathan Ake clipping his calf’s half a second before, I think he had the right to go down from that contact.

The second look likes the defender caught Wilfs foot just before the foul so good decision in my opinion. About time Wilf started to get of these penalty decisions in his favour. There isn’t a more dangerous dribbler than him in the Premier League

No one 'has a right to go down'...that's simply blatant cheating to gain an advantage. However I do agree that he was clipped by Ake just beforehand which sent him down.

The sooner everyone stops seeing it as a 'right to go down' and ref's give fouls on an equal basis both in and outside of the box the better.

The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert a moderator to this post

Painter Croydon 11 Dec 17 9.01am
Can somebody who knows the vagueness of the laws, clarify if you are booked for blatant diving like Herrera at Utd, no further action can be taken, but if the TV pundits deem Zaha dived action can be taken against him.
Alert a moderator to this post

Painter

Croydon 11 Dec 17 9.01am

Can somebody who knows the vagueness of the laws, clarify if you are booked for blatant diving like Herrera at Utd, no further action can be taken, but if the TV pundits deem Zaha dived action can be taken against him.

Alert a moderator to this post

alaneagle1 Dunstable,Bedfordshire.England 11 Dec 17 9.10am
Originally posted by Painter Can somebody who knows the vagueness of the laws, clarify if you are booked for blatant diving like Herrera at Utd, no further action can be taken, but if the TV pundits deem Zaha dived action can be taken against him. Not sure but the punishments are different. Referee sees it yellow card. Niase (Everton) incident 2 match ban. Palace 13th 2017/18.
Alert a moderator to this post

alaneagle1

Dunstable,Bedfordshire.England 11 Dec 17 9.10am

Originally posted by Painter

Not sure but the punishments are different.
Referee sees it yellow card.
Niase (Everton) incident 2 match ban.

Palace 13th 2017/18.

Alert a moderator to this post

Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 11 Dec 17 9.16am
Originally posted by Painter Can somebody who knows the vagueness of the laws, clarify if you are booked for blatant diving like Herrera at Utd, no further action can be taken, but if the TV pundits deem Zaha dived action can be taken against him. Nothing to do with TV pundits. A three person panel independently judges incidents to ascertain whether a referee was deceived into awarding a penalty. If ALL THREE deem that he was deceived that player is banned as was the case with Niasse. As for Herrera, my understanding is that he has been booked and no further action can be taken against him for the offence. Edited by Willo (11 Dec 2017 9.20am)
Alert a moderator to this post

Willo

South coast - west of Brighton. 11 Dec 17 9.16am

Originally posted by Painter

Can somebody who knows the vagueness of the laws, clarify if you are booked for blatant diving like Herrera at Utd, no further action can be taken, but if the TV pundits deem Zaha dived action can be taken against him.

Nothing to do with TV pundits.
A three person panel independently judges incidents to ascertain whether a referee was deceived into awarding a penalty.
If ALL THREE deem that he was deceived that player is banned as was the case with Niasse.

As for Herrera, my understanding is that he has been booked and no further action can be taken against him for the offence.

Edited by Willo (11 Dec 2017 9.20am)

Alert a moderator to this post

taylors lovechild 11 Dec 17 9.16am
If you are through on goal and someone fouls you but that is not enough to bring you down, but is enough to put you off scoring then it is a difficult one, as if you stay on your feet you don't score but you definitely don't get a penalty. Looking at the Bournemouth forum even some of their fans are unsure and so if a ban is given it is a clear bias against Zaha or Palace, because unlike the Niassie dive this one is not clear. For me, Wilf sometimes could stay on his feet, but he never dives. When you know the referees are against you I guess sometimes you have to force them to make a decision. One thing is for sure, Watford will foul him endlessly tomorrow night and he will win hardly any free-kicks.
Alert a moderator to this post

taylors lovechild

11 Dec 17 9.16am

Send a Private Message to taylors lovechild

If you are through on goal and someone fouls you but that is not enough to bring you down, but is enough to put you off scoring then it is a difficult one, as if you stay on your feet you don't score but you definitely don't get a penalty.

Looking at the Bournemouth forum even some of their fans are unsure and so if a ban is given it is a clear bias against Zaha or Palace, because unlike the Niassie dive this one is not clear. For me, Wilf sometimes could stay on his feet, but he never dives. When you know the referees are against you I guess sometimes you have to force them to make a decision.

One thing is for sure, Watford will foul him endlessly tomorrow night and he will win hardly any free-kicks.

Alert a moderator to this post

Spiderman Horsham 11 Dec 17 9.27am
Originally posted by Willo With respect I wasn't getting all "High and mighty" at all. It just seemed ironic that's all given what has been advocated on here. I totally disagree with your opinion of "Terrible performance" - Let's just use that label in respect of Benteke's penalty, his attitude and the fact he was allowed to take it. Edited by Willo (10 Dec 2017 7.16pm) It was a god awful performance from him and his assistant in front of the main stand. Watch the replay of the first goal he had clear sight so who knows what he was watching. Perhaps he could explain the debacle regarding the drop ball, Luka played it back, nothing wrong in the laws with that, he then spoke to him as Bournemouth complained, taken again Bournemouth kicked it back to Palace albeit 30 yds further back. The foul by Dann on Defoe in the 2nd half seemed as blatant as they come (see I am not one sided) Overall very poor performance and to cap it all he and his assistant laughed at Palace fans as they were leaving the pitch...ar*****es. Having watched football and in particular Palace since 1961 (sounding like you now Willo) I honestly believe the standard has got worse since they went full-time professional, perhaps they have become to high and mighty and they will make the PL a laughing stock
Alert a moderator to this post

Spiderman

Horsham 11 Dec 17 9.27am

Originally posted by Willo

With respect I wasn't getting all "High and mighty" at all.
It just seemed ironic that's all given what has been advocated on here.
I totally disagree with your opinion of "Terrible performance" - Let's just use that label in respect of Benteke's penalty, his attitude and the fact he was allowed to take it.

Edited by Willo (10 Dec 2017 7.16pm)

It was a god awful performance from him and his assistant in front of the main stand. Watch the replay of the first goal he had clear sight so who knows what he was watching. Perhaps he could explain the debacle regarding the drop ball, Luka played it back, nothing wrong in the laws with that, he then spoke to him as Bournemouth complained, taken again Bournemouth kicked it back to Palace albeit 30 yds further back. The foul by Dann on Defoe in the 2nd half seemed as blatant as they come (see I am not one sided) Overall very poor performance and to cap it all he and his assistant laughed at Palace fans as they were leaving the pitch...ar*****es. Having watched football and in particular Palace since 1961 (sounding like you now Willo) I honestly believe the standard has got worse since they went full-time professional, perhaps they have become to high and mighty and they will make the PL a laughing stock

Alert a moderator to this post

Painter Croydon 11 Dec 17 9.39am
Originally posted by Willo Nothing to do with TV pundits. A three person panel independently judges incidents to ascertain whether a referee was deceived into awarding a penalty. If ALL THREE deem that he was deceived that player is banned as was the case with Niasse. As for Herrera, my understanding is that he has been booked and no further action can be taken against him for the offence. Edited by Willo (11 Dec 2017 9.20am) I am sorry, but it is everything to do with TV pundits. They raise these issues with constant analysis of games with their views, putting pressure these independent judges. If they deem Zaha dived, by default they are undermining Friend and he should have his match fee deducted as he had a clear view. This type of penalty was won by Andrew Johnson numerous times, he made a career out of it. I don’t remember any talk at the time of him being charged.
Alert a moderator to this post

Painter

Croydon 11 Dec 17 9.39am

Originally posted by Willo

As for Herrera, my understanding is that he has been booked and no further action can be taken against him for the offence.

Edited by Willo (11 Dec 2017 9.20am)

I am sorry, but it is everything to do with TV pundits. They raise these issues with constant analysis of games with their views, putting pressure these independent judges. If they deem Zaha dived, by default they are undermining Friend and he should have his match fee deducted as he had a clear view.
This type of penalty was won by Andrew Johnson numerous times, he made a career out of it. I don’t remember any talk at the time of him being charged.

Alert a moderator to this post

Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 11 Dec 17 10.35am
Originally posted by Painter I am sorry, but it is everything to do with TV pundits. They raise these issues with constant analysis of games with their views, putting pressure these independent judges. If they deem Zaha dived, by default they are undermining Friend and he should have his match fee deducted as he had a clear view. This type of penalty was won by Andrew Johnson numerous times, he made a career out of it. I don’t remember any talk at the time of him being charged. The point I was making is that it is not the TV pundits who are the arbiters of whether deception took place it is the three person panel viewing the incident independently of one another. The point you are making is that the pundits influence the panel and that is open to debate.From my perspective if I was on that panel and I would make my own judgement based on what I have seen - pundits can be the worst judges !
Alert a moderator to this post

Willo

South coast - west of Brighton. 11 Dec 17 10.35am

Originally posted by Painter

The point I was making is that it is not the TV pundits who are the arbiters of whether deception took place it is the three person panel viewing the incident independently of one another.

The point you are making is that the pundits influence the panel and that is open to debate.From my perspective if I was on that panel and I would make my own judgement based on what I have seen - pundits can be the worst judges !

Alert a moderator to this post

bexleydave Barnehurst 11 Dec 17 10.44am
Originally posted by Willo The point I was making is that it is not the TV pundits who are the arbiters of whether deception took place it is the three person panel viewing the incident independently of one another. The point you are making is that the pundits influence the panel and that is open to debate.From my perspective if I was on that panel and I would make my own judgement based on what I have seen - pundits can be the worst judges ! The pundits may arguably have an influence on which incidents are reviewed, but I'm happy to rely on three individuals making up their own minds in isolation. I can't think of an alternative that would be better. Bexley Dave Can you hear the Brighton sing? I can't hear a ******* thing! "The most arrogant, obnoxious bunch of deluded little sun tanned, loafer wearing mummy's boys I've ever had the misfortune of having to listen to" (Burnley forum)
Alert a moderator to this post

bexleydave

Barnehurst 11 Dec 17 10.44am

Originally posted by Willo

The point I was making is that it is not the TV pundits who are the arbiters of whether deception took place it is the three person panel viewing the incident independently of one another.

The pundits may arguably have an influence on which incidents are reviewed, but I'm happy to rely on three individuals making up their own minds in isolation. I can't think of an alternative that would be better.

Bexley Dave

Can you hear the Brighton sing? I can't hear a ******* thing!

"The most arrogant, obnoxious bunch of deluded little sun tanned, loafer wearing mummy's boys I've ever had the misfortune of having to listen to" (Burnley forum)

Alert a moderator to this post

Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 11 Dec 17 10.55am
The role of VAR is to ensure that no clearly wrong decisions are made in conjunction with the award or non-award of a penalty kick. As I understand it, if VAR is used to determine whether it is a penalty or not and the player has been deemed to 'Dive' the player who was adjudged to have engaged in simulation will just get a 'Yellow' rather than a 'Red' at present when the panel are involved.So with VAR, players can take a chance and dive knowing it will only be a Yellow instead of a Red and they might actually get a penalty in the bargain ! And I am interested in the wording of "Clearly wrong" as opposed to just "Wrong", trying to ascertain what this will mean in practice. Edited by Willo (11 Dec 2017 10.57am)
Alert a moderator to this post

Willo

South coast - west of Brighton. 11 Dec 17 10.55am

The role of VAR is to ensure that no clearly wrong decisions are made in conjunction with the award or non-award of a penalty kick.

As I understand it, if VAR is used to determine whether it is a penalty or not and the player has been deemed to 'Dive' the player who was adjudged to have engaged in simulation will just get a 'Yellow' rather than a 'Red' at present when the panel are involved.So with VAR, players can take a chance and dive knowing it will only be a Yellow instead of a Red and they might actually get a penalty in the bargain !

And I am interested in the wording of "Clearly wrong" as opposed to just "Wrong", trying to ascertain what this will mean in practice.

Edited by Willo (11 Dec 2017 10.57am)

Alert a moderator to this post

slubglurge welling 11 Dec 17 10.58am
Just saw Ref Watch on Sky with Dermot Gallagher. He thought 1st one was a pen and 2nd one from where refs view of it also a pen but from the shot side on possibly not. Panellists mentioned simulation but Gallagher said no so i cant see Wilf being charged. I think Roy will blow a fuse if it happens
Alert a moderator to this post

slubglurge

welling 11 Dec 17 10.58am

Just saw Ref Watch on Sky with Dermot Gallagher. He thought 1st one was a pen and 2nd one from where refs view of it also a pen but from the shot side on possibly not. Panellists mentioned simulation but Gallagher said no so i cant see Wilf being charged. I think Roy will blow a fuse if it happens

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Will Wilf be charged?

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors