it couldn't not be to be fair, it had happened a few times where he seemed to be too quick and get the ball away from the player but be held back.I think thats part of the problem with having small , nippy fast players ..i think refs just believe they are simply diving all the time , amazing the pen was given for the big man
Mowbray said Fortune wasn't supposed to take the pen and wouldn't have been happy if he missed
I think thats part of the problem with having small , nippy fast players ..i think refs just believe they are simply diving all the time , amazing the pen was given for the big man
I thought the first one by the byline was nailed on, the second was never a pen (when Kent was cutting in just inside the 18 yard box), and I couldn't tell for the third whether the player got a touch in be ball. Kent does go down to easy though, and will quickly get himself a reputation.
Thought fortunes was rightly given a pen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Considering our previous performances from the penalty spot I think TM should take note of Fortunes confidence and penalty taking ability as that was a perfect pen right in the bottom corner giving the keeper no chance even though he went the right way. Let Fortune take them if hes in the side
Wasn't it fortune?I was almost level with the first call, after about two minutes, and I thought it was a good tackle. Ok he came in from behind but took the ball cleanly.
There was another call on the edge of the box but in front of goal, which was just 50/50 out muscling.
The third call, to the right of the goal was a penalty, I think, on balance, but if you go down everytime you are tackled the ref. is not going to give you benefit of doubt.
The penalty given was a penalty as the defender prevented Reda from regaining possession after they both went down.
Couldn't see the the Armstrong call - too many bodies in the way.
Reda?I was almost level with the first call, after about two minutes, and I thought it was a good tackle. Ok he came in from behind but took the ball cleanly.
There was another call on the edge of the box but in front of goal, which was just 50/50 out muscling.
The third call, to the right of the goal was a penalty, I think, on balance, but if you go down everytime you are tackled the ref. is not going to give you benefit of doubt.
The penalty given was a penalty as the defender prevented Reda from regaining possession after they both went down.
Couldn't see the the Armstrong call - too many bodies in the way.
Although Reda was making a bizarre run up the right at the same time, which if you're generous might explain some confusion. And which tbf might have pulled their defence out of shape.
the one of the end of the box Kent should have probably been booed for
Fair enough, I must have missed that in the excitement.
First I think Kent was unconvincing. Probably was a pen, but if you go down the way some footballers do now, the ref is less likely to give it.
Second for Kent, I think the lino bottled it.
Third that we won was the right call by the ref (dont think the lino gave it, and wouldnt surprise me if he missed it).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?