Shels v Sligo FAI Cup final - Lansdowne Road 6th Nov

[Dodge]

If Winters made the call (on second yellow) without thinking that he was right that is cheating - and I dont think anyone suggested that.

People in this thread have precisely suggested that. One ven claimed it was part of an overall FAI conspiracy against Shels. if you read through the thread it was this post that prompted my inital response

[dublinred]

If Winters made the call (on second yellow) without thinking that he was right that is cheating - and I dont think anyone suggested that.
Doubt that anyone thinks Winters errors were anything more than incompetence, if that is the justification then fine.

Not a cheat, just incompetent

Most people dream of scoring in a Cup final Winter probably dreamed of sending someone off , having just booked Clancy and then seeing that it was him again realised his dream , hopefully he will retire happy now.

[razor]

People in this thread have precisely suggested that. One ven claimed it was part of an overall FAI conspiracy against Shels.

And rightly so after that Sheriff carry on.
There's no organisation rights the wrongs like Frank and Irene.

[lawman]

And rightly so after that Sheriff carry on.
There's no organisation rights the wrongs like Frank and Irene.


Laughable as it may seem, surely NOBODY believes that to be the case, or am I not seeing the bigger picture? If I thought that I would never participate in Football again.

[S.E.P.1990]

And rightly so after that Sheriff carry on.
There's no organisation rights the wrongs like Frank and Irene.

Firstly, while we have been shafted by the fai before, Winters is not a conspiracy just useless.

As for the quote above I have come to expect it from someone who supports a club that has been bailed out more times than Anglo Irish and has had more names than St Petersburg....

[El-Pietro]

Firstly, while we have been shafted by the fai before, Winters is not a conspiracy just useless.

As for the quote above I have come to expect it from someone who supports a club that has been bailed out more times than Anglo Irish and has had more names than St Petersburg....

jeez, don't be so bitter

[redobit]

Yep, and 3 of those 4 trophy winners have about 10 years of history between them. Great to see new, up and coming clubs doing well for themselves, eh?

I know, sure they grow up so fast.

[razor]

As for the quote above I have come to expect it from someone who supports a club that has been bailed out more times than Anglo Irish and has had more names than St Petersburg....

and good honest players, don't forget that bit

jeez, don't be so bitter

There's a lot to be said for a bit of bitter. Cleanses the soul.

[El-Pietro]

There's a lot to be said for a bit of bitter. Cleanses the soul.

hahah, trust the FOCCER....

[KevB76]

Right, finally got round to watching replays of the sending off incident - my immediate reaction on the day was it should have been a penalty in my view from all of 70+ yards away!

But from replaying it several times, I have to say the ref got it more right than wrong.
Contact from the Rovers player was minimal, it wasnt like a push or trip or anything of that nature - put it this way, if that same contact was made anywhere else on the pitch he wouldnt have gone down, or if he had there wouldnt have been a free because there was no fowl committed - contact doesnt automatically mean a penalty, I mean look at any corner kick situation.
Add to that his own statement in the paper that he felt contact and went down. It wasnt a big theatrical dive, but nevertheless a dive it was.
So basically he WAS seeking to gain advantage by looking for a penalty, and on that basis he gave the ref a decision to make. A booking was definitely one correct option, but you have to wonder would he have been allowed use his own discretion, as we've seen plenty times before where ref's have simply allowed play to continue in similar situations.

So the question I suppose is does the ref have to apply the letter of the law, or can he use his discretion - which way is supposedly the better refereeing in the view of FIFA ?

[S.E.P.1990]

Still not bitter lads, unlike your good selves.....a cup final, promotion and over 100 years of history make the past and the present bearable.

[legendz]

It was a disappointing sending off looking back on it. The game was well poised at 1-0 to Shels who were playing well. Common sense had to prevail. There was a touch. It was enough for a penalty but it was enough for a player to not keep his balance. It was six in one and half a dozen in the other really and a case of just letting the game play on with the ball having gone through to the keeper.

[marinobohs]

[QUOTE=KevB76;1550986So the question I suppose is does the ref have to apply the letter of the law, or can he use his discretion - which way is supposedly the better refereeing in the view of FIFA ?[/QUOTE]

Perhaps explain why he (and Assistant ref) chose to ignore rule about penalties/keepers (dont believe they can have missed it) ?

Not too bothered either way - strict letter of law application OR ref's discretion - but make it consistent

[redobit]

Perhaps explain why he (and Assistant ref) chose to ignore rule about penalties/keepers (dont believe they can have missed it) ?

Not too bothered either way - strict letter of law application OR ref's discretion - but make it consistent

I was talking to a keeper (decent underage one) about moving off the line for penalties. His point was that it can look worse than it actually is because if a keeper leaps forward he lands far from the line. That dosent answer your question but it could have been a factor.

[nigel-harps1954]

I was talking to a keeper (decent underage one) about moving off the line for penalties. His point was that it can look worse than it actually is because if a keeper leaps forward he lands far from the line. That dosent answer your question but it could have been a factor.

Speaking as a keeper, it depends on how the penalty is hit. It's like choosing to dive in a certain direction, leaping forward can slightly close down the angle of the shot but you're also leaving yourself more open to shots hit into the roof of the net. It's a gamble you take, but at the end of the day, 99% of the time, you're better off leaping forward, more leverage from your leap and as I said, slightly closing down the shot. Technically you're meant to dive moving forward off the top of your body anyway.

[Charlie Darwin]

I was talking to a keeper (decent underage one) about moving off the line for penalties. His point was that it can look worse than it actually is because if a keeper leaps forward he lands far from the line. That dosent answer your question but it could have been a factor.

You can see on at least 2 of the penalties, Clarke jumps once a couple of yards forward and then dives in a separate motion. It looks worse than it is but it's still against the rules. 12 yards is a very short distance and even a small jump forward narrows the angles significantly.

[marinobohs]

I was talking to a keeper (decent underage one) about moving off the line for penalties. His point was that it can look worse than it actually is because if a keeper leaps forward he lands far from the line. That dosent answer your question but it could have been a factor.

But the (penalty) rule was broken and the officials were aware of it (unless both missed it from 6/7 yards) and made the call to ignore the breaking of that particular rule. Does not balance with argument they had no latitude on the simulation call. Lack of consistency at very least

[Nah Nah Nah Nah]

I was talking to a keeper (decent underage one) about moving off the line for penalties. His point was that it can look worse than it actually is because if a keeper leaps forward he lands far from the line. That dosent answer your question but it could have been a factor.

There's nothing wrong with a keeper coming off his line once he jumps off his line once the kick is taken. Kelly was off his line before the kicks were taken though

[KevB76]

Perhaps explain why he (and Assistant ref) chose to ignore rule about penalties/keepers (dont believe they can have missed it) ?

Not too bothered either way - strict letter of law application OR ref's discretion - but make it consistent

That was the biggest disappointment for me, he was well off his line, the penalties should have been re-taken simple as that.

[fionnsci]

Penalties should have been retaken (I presume, still haven't had time to watch the recording!) but so should a considerable percentage of penalties taken. This is an extremely frequent offence and is rarely punished (not saying rightly or wrongly, just saying).