Cham's pen

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum.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

Cham's pen

Previous Topic | Next Topic

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

Kermit8 Hevon 10 Feb 14 7.56pm
leading foot took the ball trailing foot took the man. Penalty. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 10 Feb 14 7.56pm

leading foot took the ball trailing foot took the man. Penalty.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

peterg Anerley 10 Feb 14 8.04pm
Just seen Mel still complaining about the pen on SSN. Such a shame! Palace had had rubbish luck with pens up to now - remember the cheating Ashley Young - so it was our turn to be given one. Some of the pundits think that teams are at a disadvantage if their managers speak poor English - like Mel. TP clearly tells it like it is - is that worth a couple of points at least? The right place at the right time
Alert a moderator to this post

peterg

Anerley 10 Feb 14 8.04pm

Just seen Mel still complaining about the pen on SSN. Such a shame! Palace had had rubbish luck with pens up to now - remember the cheating Ashley Young - so it was our turn to be given one.
Some of the pundits think that teams are at a disadvantage if their managers speak poor English - like Mel. TP clearly tells it like it is - is that worth a couple of points at least?

The right place at the right time

Alert a moderator to this post

sueagle2012 10 Feb 14 8.55pm
Isn't it amazing that with the high stakes involved, most officials and experts still do not have a clear idea when it should be penalty and when not when keeper makes a tackle on the forward. I was at the game and saw it from Holmsdale and first impression was penalty ( although I also thought Gabbidon takle on Shane Long the other day Vs Hull was a penalty and was relieved it was not given ) ..then watched it a number of times on Sky Goals on sunday, MoTD etc and my view of it was that he got too much of Chamakh, even though he may have got slight touch of the ball. All the comments above begs the question ...is it OK to get a bit of of the ball and bring down the man. In this incident he catches Chamakh, then gets abit of the ball and then with the other foot brings down Chamakh properly. There have been several similar incidents this season. Once again, I would have thought that with the high stakes involved there would be better guidance to referees and better communication about this type of incident to clubs, players, media and supporters. Edited by sueagle2012 (10 Feb 2014 8.55pm) Edited by sueagle2012 (10 Feb 2014 8.58pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

sueagle2012

10 Feb 14 8.55pm

Isn't it amazing that with the high stakes involved, most officials and experts still do not have a clear idea when it should be penalty and when not when keeper makes a tackle on the forward.

I was at the game and saw it from Holmsdale and first impression was penalty ( although I also thought Gabbidon takle on Shane Long the other day Vs Hull was a penalty and was relieved it was not given ) ..then watched it a number of times on Sky Goals on sunday, MoTD etc and my view of it was that he got too much of Chamakh, even though he may have got slight touch of the ball.

All the comments above begs the question ...is it OK to get a bit of of the ball and bring down the man. In this incident he catches Chamakh, then gets abit of the ball and then with the other foot brings down Chamakh properly.

There have been several similar incidents this season. Once again, I would have thought that with the high stakes involved there would be better guidance to referees and better communication about this type of incident to clubs, players, media and supporters.

Edited by sueagle2012 (10 Feb 2014 8.55pm)

Edited by sueagle2012 (10 Feb 2014 8.58pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Blue'n'red Field of Chels (Orpington) 10 Feb 14 8.59pm
At the time I saw Cham go down and screamed pen ... was surprised no card was given!!! Watching it on MOTD ... Foster brings his studs up after making contact with the ball ... luckily Cham avoids them ... THAT is why the pen was given? They say hard work never hurt anyone ... but why take a chance?
Alert a moderator to this post

Blue'n'red

Field of Chels (Orpington) 10 Feb 14 8.59pm

At the time I saw Cham go down and screamed pen ... was surprised no card was given!!!

Watching it on MOTD ... Foster brings his studs up after making contact with the ball ... luckily Cham avoids them ... THAT is why the pen was given?

They say hard work never hurt anyone ... but why take a chance?

Alert a moderator to this post

james03 Bangkok 11 Feb 14 1.50am
Quote sueagle2012 at 10 Feb 2014 8.55pm Isn't it amazing that with the high stakes involved, most officials and experts still do not have a clear idea when it should be penalty and when not when keeper makes a tackle on the forward. I was at the game and saw it from Holmsdale and first impression was penalty ( although I also thought Gabbidon takle on Shane Long the other day Vs Hull was a penalty and was relieved it was not given ) ..then watched it a number of times on Sky Goals on sunday, MoTD etc and my view of it was that he got too much of Chamakh, even though he may have got slight touch of the ball. All the comments above begs the question ...is it OK to get a bit of of the ball and bring down the man. In this incident he catches Chamakh, then gets abit of the ball and then with the other foot brings down Chamakh properly. There have been several similar incidents this season. Once again, I would have thought that with the high stakes involved there would be better guidance to referees and better communication about this type of incident to clubs, players, media and supporters. Edited by sueagle2012 (10 Feb 2014 8.55pm) Edited by sueagle2012 (10 Feb 2014 8.58pm) That was never ever a penalty and was pure gamesmanship from Long. Gabbidon never veered from his path but Long did, he crossed in to Gabbidons path, depsite the ball not going in that direction, then hooked his leg in front of DG. It was his intention to go down once he realised he was not able to cut inside and have a shot. Whether or not that is cheating I do not know as the rules rather confuse me these days. The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made. Groucho Marx
Alert a moderator to this post

james03

Bangkok 11 Feb 14 1.50am

Quote sueagle2012 at 10 Feb 2014 8.55pm

Isn't it amazing that with the high stakes involved, most officials and experts still do not have a clear idea when it should be penalty and when not when keeper makes a tackle on the forward.

I was at the game and saw it from Holmsdale and first impression was penalty ( although I also thought Gabbidon takle on Shane Long the other day Vs Hull was a penalty and was relieved it was not given ) ..then watched it a number of times on Sky Goals on sunday, MoTD etc and my view of it was that he got too much of Chamakh, even though he may have got slight touch of the ball.

Edited by sueagle2012 (10 Feb 2014 8.55pm)

Edited by sueagle2012 (10 Feb 2014 8.58pm)

That was never ever a penalty and was pure gamesmanship from Long. Gabbidon never veered from his path but Long did, he crossed in to Gabbidons path, depsite the ball not going in that direction, then hooked his leg in front of DG. It was his intention to go down once he realised he was not able to cut inside and have a shot. Whether or not that is cheating I do not know as the rules rather confuse me these days.

The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made. Groucho Marx

Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow SE19 11 Feb 14 2.12am
I didn't think it was a penalty, Foster clearly took the ball. Expertly dispatched nevertheless.
Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow

SE19 11 Feb 14 2.12am

Send a Private Message to EverybodyDannsNow

I didn't think it was a penalty, Foster clearly took the ball. Expertly dispatched nevertheless.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mangopablo south LONDON 11 Feb 14 7.52am
Quote palace99 at 10 Feb 2014 10.46am Quote StainesPalace at 09 Feb 2014 9.01am Keeper clearly won the ball was never a penalty. Great finish tho. I think we'll end up playing Chamakh and Murray up front. I'm glad you said that as from my view in Homesdale B and confirmed on TV keeper definitely touches ball first and then momentum takes him into Chamakh. You could argue that ball didn't get pushed too far away and Chamakh might have still got to it but i think we definitely got lucky there. Whislt really pleased with the result and 3 goals i think the pen disguised a really poor 2nd half performance. WBA controled the half and but for an amazing save from Jules would have equalised. We offered very little in second half and could have paid the price. I think this is right. However, apart from their defence, West Brom looked like a decent side. In the second half they had a lot of forwards on the pitch and many sides would have struggled against them. They scored 3 away at Villa the other day. Of course, we hit them on the break with the penalty. After our good home run, we are assuming that we will beat all the lower teams. If we think back to IH and the Fulham game, we can see just how good our run has really been. Edited by Mangopablo (11 Feb 2014 7.53am) "The course of true love never did run smooth"
Alert a moderator to this post

Mangopablo

south LONDON 11 Feb 14 7.52am

Quote palace99 at 10 Feb 2014 10.46am

Quote StainesPalace at 09 Feb 2014 9.01am

Keeper clearly won the ball was never a penalty. Great finish tho. I think we'll end up playing Chamakh and Murray up front.

I'm glad you said that as from my view in Homesdale B and confirmed on TV keeper definitely touches ball first and then momentum takes him into Chamakh. You could argue that ball didn't get pushed too far away and Chamakh might have still got to it but i think we definitely got lucky there. Whislt really pleased with the result and 3 goals i think the pen disguised a really poor 2nd half performance. WBA controled the half and but for an amazing save from Jules would have equalised. We offered very little in second half and could have paid the price.

I think this is right. However, apart from their defence, West Brom looked like a decent side. In the second half they had a lot of forwards on the pitch and many sides would have struggled against them. They scored 3 away at Villa the other day. Of course, we hit them on the break with the penalty. After our good home run, we are assuming that we will beat all the lower teams. If we think back to IH and the Fulham game, we can see just how good our run has really been.

Edited by Mangopablo (11 Feb 2014 7.53am)

"The course of true love never did run smooth"

Alert a moderator to this post

peterg Anerley 11 Feb 14 9.46am
Yeah I agree that West Brom were impressive in the second half and it was only that stunning pointblank save by Jules that kept us ahead. It's pleasing that we have nicked these important wins against relegation rivals but all have been close matches and none of our opponents were significantly worse than us. At the moment we have to hope that Fulham and Cardiff continue to implode and one of the other rivals hits a bad spell. I think the fight to avoid the third relegation spot will be incredibly close and we could well be involved. Fingers crossed! The right place at the right time
Alert a moderator to this post

peterg

Anerley 11 Feb 14 9.46am

Yeah I agree that West Brom were impressive in the second half and it was only that stunning pointblank save by Jules that kept us ahead. It's pleasing that we have nicked these important wins against relegation rivals but all have been close matches and none of our opponents were significantly worse than us. At the moment we have to hope that Fulham and Cardiff continue to implode and one of the other rivals hits a bad spell. I think the fight to avoid the third relegation spot will be incredibly close and we could well be involved. Fingers crossed!

The right place at the right time

Alert a moderator to this post

madcap_v2 SE25 / Ibiza 11 Feb 14 1.11pm
Quote palace99 at 10 Feb 2014 2.58pm Quote Plane at 10 Feb 2014 1.40pm Quote paperhat at 10 Feb 2014 1.37pm I'd naively assumed that if you follow through and tak eout a player, it doesnt matter if you touch the ball or not first, its still a foul? What I don't get is what happened with this on sat. If Chamakh dive, he should have been given a yellow, if Foster took him out then he should have had a yellow or red. Either way , there should have been a card given? Of course you're correct. I agree, it should have been a yellow for the keeper. so extending your logic every slide tackle must be a foul as you always take out the man afterwards as he will always fall over your extended leg. A foul for me is if you don't take the ball first and/or you go in in a dangerous way. I don't think Foster was particularly dangerous and he definitely touched the ball first, hence it was a fortunate penalty imho. Would you have been happy if Jules had conceded one in the same circumstances?? Completely agree with this. As long as the tackle isn't dangerous, how can it be a foul if the ball is taken first? La la la your mum
Alert a moderator to this post

madcap_v2

SE25 / Ibiza 11 Feb 14 1.11pm

Quote palace99 at 10 Feb 2014 2.58pm

Quote Plane at 10 Feb 2014 1.40pm

Quote paperhat at 10 Feb 2014 1.37pm

I'd naively assumed that if you follow through and tak eout a player, it doesnt matter if you touch the ball or not first, its still a foul?

What I don't get is what happened with this on sat. If Chamakh dive, he should have been given a yellow, if Foster took him out then he should have had a yellow or red. Either way , there should have been a card given?

Of course you're correct.

I agree, it should have been a yellow for the keeper.

so extending your logic every slide tackle must be a foul as you always take out the man afterwards as he will always fall over your extended leg.

A foul for me is if you don't take the ball first and/or you go in in a dangerous way.

I don't think Foster was particularly dangerous and he definitely touched the ball first, hence it was a fortunate penalty imho.

Would you have been happy if Jules had conceded one in the same circumstances??

Completely agree with this. As long as the tackle isn't dangerous, how can it be a foul if the ball is taken first?

La la la your mum

Alert a moderator to this post

Bjerntheman Kongsberg/norway 14 Feb 14 5.32pm
I'm quite happy with my video. Clear pen. Great day at selhurst. We love you!
Alert a moderator to this post

Bjerntheman

Kongsberg/norway 14 Feb 14 5.32pm

I'm quite happy with my video.

Clear pen. Great day at selhurst.

We love you!

Alert a moderator to this post

eagles911 14 Feb 14 5.56pm
Quote coulsdoneagle at 08 Feb 2014 8.56pm Quote Dangermouse at 08 Feb 2014 8.43pm Quote Robcpfc at 08 Feb 2014 8.32pm Quote Does the return of FFS spell the end for Cameron Jerome? Quote I bloody hope so! Cam Jam is he worst player we've had at this club in a long time: doesn't work, can't shoot, bad touch on him, puts no effort in the quicker he goes back to stoke the better I ask the question and I believe the answer is yes, but no one can ever question his workrate and effort. His hold up play is either excellent or incredibly poor and that all or nothing habit is not good for him or the team, but the bottom line is he is never a goal threat. Muzza is nowhere near 90 min fit, and Jerome is also a option to have on the bench especially to help see out a last 15 min of a one nil win. Don't think it's the end yet, and who knows how muzza will adapt, he could even pick up another niggle. Personally I think WIlbraham is a better option than jerome to see out the last 15 mins of a game, IMO anyway.
Alert a moderator to this post

eagles911

14 Feb 14 5.56pm

Quote coulsdoneagle at 08 Feb 2014 8.56pm

Quote Dangermouse at 08 Feb 2014 8.43pm

Quote Robcpfc at 08 Feb 2014 8.32pm

Quote
Does the return of FFS spell the end for Cameron Jerome?

Quote

I bloody hope so! Cam Jam is he worst player we've had at this club in a long time: doesn't work, can't shoot, bad touch on him, puts no effort in the quicker he goes back to stoke the better

I ask the question and I believe the answer is yes, but no one can ever question his workrate and effort. His hold up play is either excellent or incredibly poor and that all or nothing habit is not good for him or the team, but the bottom line is he is never a goal threat.

Muzza is nowhere near 90 min fit, and Jerome is also a option to have on the bench especially to help see out a last 15 min of a one nil win. Don't think it's the end yet, and who knows how muzza will adapt, he could even pick up another niggle.

Personally I think WIlbraham is a better option than jerome to see out the last 15 mins of a game, IMO anyway.

Alert a moderator to this post

Lawrie Brooks Green (near Horsham) 14 Feb 14 6.04pm
Thanks for posting that vid bjerntheman. Makes it look even better from that angle. My god....Chams cool, isn't he.
Alert a moderator to this post

Lawrie

Brooks Green (near Horsham) 14 Feb 14 6.04pm

Thanks for posting that vid bjerntheman.
Makes it look even better from that angle.
My god....Chams cool, isn't he.

Alert a moderator to this post

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

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Cham's pen

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors