Penalty or No Penalty ?

[FromTheCapital]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...an/default.stm

Far too soft to give a penalty in my eyes ! Poor decision from Thomson I think.

Now, I know we won and that's all that matter's but want to see what you think.

[lyonhibs]

Was it the clear and needless tug on the Mwell players jersey that leads you to this conclusion?? Right under the referees nose, with it being a known fact that such tugging has been - apparently - targeted by referees this season??

Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, is our Mr Nish??

Not to mention the fact that he shouldn't have let it come over his head and bounce in the 1st place. He should have been using his 6'4" frame to get a head or foot on that before it hit the ground, thus giving the Mwell player no chance of gaining possession in the 1st place.

[FromTheCapital]

Still far too soft to give a pen. Football is not a non contact sport IMO.

[Bishop Hibee]

Nish should have cleared it, the Motherwell player had a wee tug at Nish then Nish had a bigger tug at him. Very soft and we'd see about 5 pens a game if shirt pulling is punished every time.

I expect to be howling with rage as we are denied a more blatant shirt pulling decision on Sunday. Are we allowed to howl with rage in the new East Stand

[Godsahibby]

Letter of the law, it had to be a penalty, a very soft one though. Mind you if referees are clamping down on tugging this season then we are going to see a hell of a lot of penalties been given any time a corner comes in the box!

[lyonhibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Still far too soft to give a pen. Football is not a non contact sport IMO.

I agree in principle, but this wasn't like him and Nish went shoulder to shoulder, or Nish put in any sort of honest physical challenge.

He tugged the guy's shirt - granted, we're not talking a massive tug or anything - but still very daft, with the Mwell playing not even facing the goal and us having just taken a 2 goal lead.

[Diclonius]

Hey - at least we'll beat Hearts. I can't see Zaliukas being able to twig it in his tiny little mind that he won't get away with that crap any more.

[LancashireHibby]

You can't tug a player's shirt in the area, especially when he's about to play the ball, or it'll be a penalty. Simple as that. The daft thing is that the Motherwell man wasn't even facing towards goal so it was a completely unnecesary penalty (though I do think their claim earlier in the second half was pretty plausible as well).

[H18sry]

If it was Deeks getting his shirt tugged we would all be shouting for a penalty

[brog]

I think people are letting their dislike for Nish override their common sense here. Both players had minimal tugs at each other, in over 50 years of watching football I have never seen a softer penalty. Is there anyone on this board who honestly thinks such a penalty would have been given against the OF?
Other observations from Sunday.

• Well's non penalty, Sutton never even claimed, it was an incident that happens in nearly every game. However I have no doubt it influenced the ref's subsequent decision.
• Stokes looks 10 pounds fitter & half a yard faster. Great news!!

[PaulSmith]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think people are letting their dislike for Nish override their common sense here. Both players had minimal tugs at each other, in over 50 years of watching football I have never seen a softer penalty. Is there anyone on this board who honestly thinks such a penalty would have been given against the OF?

Other observations from Sunday.

• Well's non penalty, Sutton never even claimed, it was an incident that happens in nearly every game. However I have no doubt it influenced the ref's subsequent decision.
• Stokes looks 10 pounds fitter & half a yard faster. Great news!!

Did you miss Papac being penalised on Sat against Killie?

[--------]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You can't tug a player's shirt in the area, especially when he's about to play the ball, or it'll be a penalty. Simple as that. The daft thing is that the Motherwell man wasn't even facing towards goal so it was a completely unnecesary penalty (though I do think their claim earlier in the second half was pretty plausible as well).

That's what i thought initially, but I'm beginning to wonder now whether Hogg managed to get something on the ball. The player who went down doesn't seem to be appealing for a penalty - only two guys behind him, and one of them is quite far away.

The Nish incident was clearly a penalty, and the ref was perfectly placed to spot it. No complaints except about CN being a very silly boy.

[Thecat23]

I'm delighted ref's are now punishing players for this.. people are saying but you will get 5/6 pens a game. No you won't because it would stop if all the ref's followed the rules.. and it maybe stop defenders throwing strikers round the box like an empty tracksuits.

[Diclonius]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I expect to be howling with rage as we are denied a more blatant shirt pulling decision on Sunday. Are we allowed to howl with rage in the new East Stand

Only at the opposition. Howing with rage at Nish is strictly off limits.

[stubru59]

Two seasons ago that wasn't a penalty. This season it is and the players had been well warned of how the refs intended to enforce the rule.

[Twa Cairpets]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think people are letting their dislike for Nish override their common sense here. Both players had minimal tugs at each other, in over 50 years of watching football I have never seen a softer penalty.

You are kidding, right? There was absolutely no doubt it was a penalty. It wasn't "soft", it wasn't anything to do with it being a non-contact sport or even to do with the instruction that has been given to refs to watch for shirt pulling, it was a penalty because it was an offence punishable by a direct free kick that took place in the penalty area. As for not seeing a "softer penalty in 50 years of watching football", you must have missed a hell of a lot of penalty incidents.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is there anyone on this board who honestly thinks such a penalty would have been given against the OF?

Me, for one

[(((Fergus)))]

Nish's intervention is enough to put the player on the ground so, no, not soft at all.

They should also have had another one when Hogg did his gridiron tackle, taking out the man without either of them touching the ball.

[Pete70]

Definate pen. I wouldn't be happy if it was the other way round we were denied it