Absolutely not a penalty, he stuck his leg across the defender, ignoring the ball and grabbing his shirt at the same time. He was trying to con the ref, got what he deserved, f-all.
Absolutely not a penalty, he stuck his leg across the defender, ignoring the ball and grabbing his shirt at the same time. He was trying to con the ref, got what he deserved, f-all.
Absolute toilet!
we went out because we were shirt but that’s a penalty all day long
The Scotland player did step across in front of the defender but he was within playing distance of the ball and therefore it’s not obstruction. He has the right to take that option if he chooses. This happens all the time when defenders are letting the ball run off for a goal kick and if the attacker clatters into them like that it’s a foul.
Therefore for me it’s an absolute penalty.
If there’s any doubt it has to go to VAR surely?
Seriously, we have VAR ruling out several goals for offsides not apparent to the naked eye, and yet when a defender brings down an opponent in the box with no attempt to play the ball the VAR team go to sleep.
As much as I was surprised at VAR not looking at the pen incident, there wasn’t a review for the goal. It was close, bearing in mind the goals that Lukaku has had chalked off.
The Scotland player did step across in front of the defender but he was within playing distance of the ball and therefore it’s not obstruction. He has the right to take that option if he chooses. This happens all the time when defenders are letting the ball run off for a goal kick and if the attacker clatters into them like that it’s a foul.
Therefore for me it’s an absolute penalty.
If there’s any doubt it has to go to VAR surely?
Seriously, we have VAR ruling out several goals for offsides not apparent to the naked eye, and yet when a defender brings down an opponent in the box with no attempt to play the ball the VAR team go to sleep.
But the defender also has the right to run in a straight line towards the ball. As you say, the Scotland plays stepped (jumped actually) across the line of the defender whilst having a handful of his shirt and caused the collision. So no penalty for me.
Never managed to see the match as I was on a flight, but sounds like our performance followed a similar path to the rest of the tournament.
Ultimately we have three decent players in Robertson, McGinn and McTominay. The rest range from alright-ish (Gilmour, Hendry) to nowhere near good enough (Gunn, MacGregor, any of the strikers). Qualifying for these tournaments has been a good step forward from Clarke (although the difficulty has been hugely reduced thanks to the expanded tournament size). But now that we’ve qualified a couple of times, breaking the long run without a major tournament, I wonder if being cannon fodder every four years is going to be enough for people.
Scotland used to have great players and they never did anthing in tournaments if they managed to qualify. This lot are ordinary and whilst I am critical of Southgate's negativity, when you have Che Adams as your stand out striker you do have to be a bit negative.
I thought they should definitely have had a penalty and the goal was a sucker punch when they had to take big risks. I wasn't impressed with Hungary at all and don't think they deserve to qualify. Clarke is probably doing as good a job as it is possible to do with the players he has.
As much as I was surprised at VAR not looking at the pen incident, there wasn’t a review for the goal. It was close, bearing in mind the goals that Lukaku has had chalked off.
As much as I was surprised at VAR not looking at the pen incident, there wasn’t a review for the goal. It was close, bearing in mind the goals that Lukaku has had chalked off.
Who said it wasn’t checked?
If it was it wasn’t communicated, they told us there was a potential pen check when the Hungry player was knocked out.
As much as I was surprised at VAR not looking at the pen incident, there wasn’t a review for the goal. It was close, bearing in mind the goals that Lukaku has had chalked off.
They probably did check it, but as it was onside didn't feel the need to publicly announce a goal check.
I'm pretty sure they check all goals but it's only the contentious ones we get to know about. Plus with the new semi-automated offsides, that would've taken them 5 seconds to check.
The Scotland player did step across in front of the defender but he was within playing distance of the ball and therefore it’s not obstruction. He has the right to take that option if he chooses. This happens all the time when defenders are letting the ball run off for a goal kick and if the attacker clatters into them like that it’s a foul.
Therefore for me it’s an absolute penalty.
If there’s any doubt it has to go to VAR surely?
Seriously, we have VAR ruling out several goals for offsides not apparent to the naked eye, and yet when a defender brings down an opponent in the box with no attempt to play the ball the VAR team go to sleep.
But the defender also has the right to run in a straight line towards the ball. As you say, the Scotland plays stepped (jumped actually) across the line of the defender whilst having a handful of his shirt and caused the collision. So no penalty for me.
This principle is never applied in the modern game. Maybe 30 years ago but nowadays anywhere else on the pitch and possibly with a more esteemed player shielding the ball, it would be given as a foul. As for holding for holding the shirt, this happens after contact with his leg so it’s irrelevant.
I think there’s a lot of bias against Scotland. If that was against Charlton or England everyone would be screaming ’stonewall penalty. ’
Comments
Incredible that they've failed to qualify 12 times now.
we went out because we were shirt but that’s a penalty all day long
Belgium 0-1 Slovakia
Denmark 1-1 England
Switzerland 1-1 Germany
The treble (Slovakia, Draw, Draw) would’ve paid almost 100/1
Can't imagine they will schedule anything there past that though?
Doesn't feel like many!
He has the right to take that option if he chooses.
This happens all the time when defenders are letting the ball run off for a goal kick and if the attacker clatters into them like that it’s a foul.
Therefore for me it’s an absolute penalty.
If there’s any doubt it has to go to VAR surely?
Seriously, we have VAR ruling out several goals for offsides not apparent to the naked eye, and yet when a defender brings down an opponent in the box with no attempt to play the ball the VAR team go to sleep.
https://youtu.be/hhIMMk1fMs8?si=lh78Ng1sqT6bugS3
Anyway - I have had a good look at the replay of the penalty shout. And my conclusion is……..
Inconclusive.
I need to get another angle.
Ultimately we have three decent players in Robertson, McGinn and McTominay. The rest range from alright-ish (Gilmour, Hendry) to nowhere near good enough (Gunn, MacGregor, any of the strikers). Qualifying for these tournaments has been a good step forward from Clarke (although the difficulty has been hugely reduced thanks to the expanded tournament size). But now that we’ve qualified a couple of times, breaking the long run without a major tournament, I wonder if being cannon fodder every four years is going to be enough for
people.
I thought they should definitely have had a penalty and the goal was a sucker punch when they had to take big risks. I wasn't impressed with Hungary at all and don't think they deserve to qualify. Clarke is probably doing as good a job as it is possible to do with the players he has.
I'm pretty sure they check all goals but it's only the contentious ones we get to know about. Plus with the new semi-automated offsides, that would've taken them 5 seconds to check.
As for holding for holding the shirt, this happens after contact with his leg so it’s irrelevant.
I think there’s a lot of bias against Scotland. If that was against Charlton or England everyone would be screaming ’stonewall penalty. ’
No Hungarian flags in the England end or Csoboth on the back of shirts, but they will prove no Scotland no party isn't true.