Penalty law of the game

Simple.

If the referee thought it was a penalty, he should have given the penalty immediately. You can give him another chance (2 in fact) let him cock those chances up & then give him a third chance (which was illegal as there was encroachment from the Sunderland players).

It was a penalty though.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Yep, ill take the interpretation of the rule from a guy who has played in the PL for 20 seasons and one of the most respected pundits in the game, over some self indulgent know it all.

Whilst I will use my own common sense and the interpretation of a number of vastly experienced referee's who are clearly better qualified than a tv pundit. fact still remains it was a red and a pen. Surely each case is different when it comes to advantage and its better to play on a "few" seconds to make the right decision than to blow up early. If he had gone on to scoreyou would have remained with 11 men not sure what more dowd could have done for you? Just wave it away? Even if hr had played on too long it was still a red and lets be honest they battered you with ten men.
Maybe uncle vinny should write another complaint to the premier league, uefa and the UN to appeal against the world of football cheating against capital city cardiff.

Yawn

He played the advantage, they failed to take advantage. They shouldnt then get another go.

Yawn
he played advantage, there wasn't any advantage so he brought it back. If tje ref did make a mistake it was the fact he could have blown earlier as it was clear there wasnt going to be andvantage as jaun ca had ensured the chance was wrecked. The only benefit of the advantage was to Cardiff as it was the only way you could avoid going to ten men.

Is the correct answer

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Yep, ill take the interpretation of the rule from a guy who has played in the PL for 20 seasons and one of the most respected pundits in the game, over some self indulgent know it all.

Whilst I will use my own common sense and the interpretation of a number of vastly experienced referee's who are clearly better qualified than a tv pundit. fact still remains it was a red and a pen. Surely each case is different when it comes to advantage and its better to play on a "few" seconds to make the right decision than to blow up early. If he had gone on to scoreyou would have remained with 11 men not sure what more dowd could have done for you? Just wave it away? Even if hr had played on too long it was still a red and lets be honest they battered you with ten men.
Maybe uncle vinny should write another complaint to the premier league, uefa and the UN to appeal against the world of football cheating against capital city cardiff.

Yawn

He played the advantage, they failed to take advantage. They shouldnt then get another go.

Yawn
he played advantage, there wasn't any advantage so he brought it back. If tje ref did make a mistake it was the fact he could have blown earlier as it was clear there wasnt going to be andvantage as jaun ca had ensured the chance was wrecked. The only benefit of the advantage was to Cardiff as it was the only way you could avoid going to ten men.

Is the correct answer

If this thread proves anything, it proves conclusively that pork cannot be educated.

Its a fantastic thread, people making up their own meanings for words inserted into the law book and then complaining that their interpretation (which isnt the meaning of the word at all) wasn't adhered to

This, added to the complaint to the FA after their last drubbing regarding team sheets goes to show they are currently in a very bad place.... And there are toys everywhere

A different view but the contact was near wickhams wrist which cala let go of before it entered the box. The fact his feet were inside the box is surely irrelevant as there was no contact with his feet. Also how was what cala more of a foul than what wes Brown did to Campbell when it was 0 0?

The fact that Wickham's feet were inside the box is crucial. After all, the game is football, not wristball. The position of one's hand being over the line but feet outside would be irrelevant because you aren't allowed to score with your hands, arms, etc.

Cala intentionally pulled and thereby turned Wickham, preventing a goal scoring opportunity while the player in possession had his feet over the line. Therefore, no complaints. Sending off, penalty.

The first offence in that passage of play was Wickham putting an outstretched arm on Cala to push him away. It was only then that Cala grabbed his arm. Fact!

Play it back and watch it.

Its a fantastic thread, people making up their own meanings for words inserted into the law book and then complaining that their interpretation (which isnt the meaning of the word at all) wasn't adhered to

This, added to the complaint to the FA after their last drubbing regarding team sheets goes to show they are currently in a very bad place.... And there are toys everywhere

So first of all you say the ref exersiced discretion of the rules.. so basically you are admitting there that he took too long to blow up. Then you say a few means more than one but not many. Make you're mind up which one is it to be? You're contradicting yourself. Basically you know you're talking bollocks.

Its a fantastic thread, people making up their own meanings for words inserted into the law book and then complaining that their interpretation (which isnt the meaning of the word at all) wasn't adhered to

This, added to the complaint to the FA after their last drubbing regarding team sheets goes to show they are currently in a very bad place.... And there are toys everywhere

So first of all you say the ref exersiced discretion of the rules.. so basically you are admitting there that he took too long to blow up. Then you say a few means more than one but not many. Make you're mind up which one is it to be? You're contradicting yourself. Basically you know you're talking bollocks.

Save your energy fella, he always contradicts himself but he will just go around in circles.

Its a fantastic thread, people making up their own meanings for words inserted into the law book and then complaining that their interpretation (which isnt the meaning of the word at all) wasn't adhered to

This, added to the complaint to the FA after their last drubbing regarding team sheets goes to show they are currently in a very bad place.... And there are toys everywhere

So first of all you say the ref exersiced discretion of the rules.. so basically you are admitting there that he took too long to blow up. Then you say a few means more than one but not many. Make you're mind up which one is it to be? You're contradicting yourself. Basically you know you're talking bollocks.

How have I admitted he took too long? I have done no such thing, you have made that up to say ive contradicted myself where in fact ive done nothing of the sort. Read the rules for gods sake

The rules state certain words in which the ref can decide.... Like "a few". A few means more than one but not many - 8 is more than one and its not many either.

Penalty, spot on decision and rightly punished.

Last edited by Roath_Magic_ on Wed Apr 30, 2014 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

Its a fantastic thread, people making up their own meanings for words inserted into the law book and then complaining that their interpretation (which isnt the meaning of the word at all) wasn't adhered to

This, added to the complaint to the FA after their last drubbing regarding team sheets goes to show they are currently in a very bad place.... And there are toys everywhere

So first of all you say the ref exersiced discretion of the rules.. so basically you are admitting there that he took too long to blow up. Then you say a few means more than one but not many. Make you're mind up which one is it to be? You're contradicting yourself. Basically you know you're talking bollocks.

Save your energy fella, he always contradicts himself but he will just go around in circles.

Jesus Christ

Maybe Graham can bring some sense to the thread...

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.