Leicester disallowed penalty

[Scouse Hibee]

You don't see that very often. The same thing happened in the CL this week but penalty was allowed to stand despite the two touches.

[Haymaker]

Technically the letter of the law. Not that he meant it though so a bit harsh but...

[jgl07]

You don't see that very often. The same thing happened in the CL this week but penalty was allowed to stand despite the two touches.

I was at the match.

Mahrez slipped as he was about to take the penalty kick, he scuffed the ball off one foot onto another and into the corner of the net.

I have never seen that happen before. The referee was absolutely right to disallow the goal as the rules are very clear.

Maybe unlucky for Leicester but you can argue that he was lucky not to scuff the ball straight to the goalkeeper or wide of the goal as he had no idea where the ball would finish up.

[wookie70]

Well played ref. Amazing how many players slip when taking pens.

[Scouse Hibee]

I was at the match.

Mahrez slipped as he was about to take the penalty kick, he scuffed the ball off one foot onto another and into the corner of the net.

I have never seen that happen before. The referee was absolutely right to disallow the goal as the rules are very clear.

Maybe unlucky for Leicester but you can argue that he was lucky not to scuff the ball straight to the goalkeeper or wide of the goal as he had no idea where the ball would finish up.

Yes I know exactly what happened, I have seen it and I also saw it during the week in the CL game, twice in one week, one allowed to stand, the other disallowed. I can't recall ever seeing it happen before this week either. Referee was indeed spot on.

[jgl07]

Yes I know exactly what happened, I have seen it and I also saw it during the week in the CL game, twice in one week, one allowed to stand, the other disallowed. I can't recall ever seeing it happen before this week either. Referee was indeed spot on.
It may have been significant that Willy Cabellero made little attempt to save the shot and immediately signalled to the referee appealing for it to be disallowed. The referee took an instant decision to chalk it off. Most of the crowd hadn't a clue what was happening.

Top marks for the referee who had come up for a lot of flak earlier for not making decisions and leaning on his linesmen even though he was better placed to see the incident.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Open to question though if the ref brings in letter of the law because the Man City forwards were encroaching into the box so unless one infringement counts and one doesn't maybe a respot was the best option.

[Juice-Terry]

I think the ref got it wrong. Unless they've changed the rules the penalty should be retaken. After a dead ball situation the ball has to roll the full circumference before it's considered back in play. It clearly never did that before Mahrez took his 'second touch'. Therefore the ball was never in play and the penalty should have been retaken.

[Scouse Hibee]

I think the ref got it wrong. Unless they've changed the rules the penalty should be retaken. After a dead ball situation the ball has to roll the full circumference before it's considered back in play. It clearly never did that before Mahrez took his 'second touch'. Therefore the ball was never in play and the penalty should have been retaken.

The ref was correct, the ball only has to clearly move to prove it was touched when taking a penalty it doesn't need to roll it's full circumference.

[hibbysam]

The ref was correct, the ball only has to clearly move to prove it was touched when taking a penalty it doesn't need to roll it's full circumference.

Correct, even corners and free kicks have changed to this rule now as far as I remember.

[Juice-Terry]

So penalties are different from every other dead ball situation?

[Speedy]

Open to question though if the ref brings in letter of the law because the Man City forwards were encroaching into the box so unless one infringement counts and one doesn't maybe a respot was the best option.

Interesting point.

As an aside I think the rule should be changed so that two touches is a retake. The rule as it is isn't really in the spirit of the game.

[Juice-Terry]

Ok. Fair enough.

[eezyrider]

Interesting point.

As an aside I think the rule should be changed so that two touches is a retake. The rule as it is isn't really in the spirit of the game.


I would disagree. If the ball hits the bar or post I don't think he should get a retake just for being able to touch it again.

EZ

[houstonhibbee]

Interesting point.

As an aside I think the rule should be changed so that two touches is a retake. The rule as it is isn't really in the spirit of the game.
If its accidental then yes i.e. a slip or trip but not if its intentional

[ekhibee]

Open to question though if the ref brings in letter of the law because the Man City forwards were encroaching into the box so unless one infringement counts and one doesn't maybe a respot was the best option.
Yes, that's what I thought too. If the Man City players were encroaching then you would have thought there would have been a retake.