Debatable Decisions – Premiere League Week Twelve

Debatable Decisions returns with game week twelve and after a lengthy international break we have something of a corker for you this week. Andre Mariner makes one of the biggest Premier League refereeing cock ups of all time, Tony Pulis and Stoke continue to get what they deserve as their lead at the top of the Decisions Table is chipped away and Jerome Thomas fails to learn from his Suarez mistakes.

Man City – Newcastle

Ryan Taylor Penalty

City’s opening goal came from the spot, a penalty awarded when Ryan Taylor blocked Yaya Toure’s goal bound effort with his arm. The usual debate arose, ball to arm or arm to ball?

Simon: “Nothing debatable about this one, it was as clear cut a penalty as you’re ever likely to see. No need to have his arm in that position and when the ball strikes it he’s impeding play. It didn’t look at that troublesome a shot either, probably kicking himself now, not that it would have changed the result.”

Ben: “When you defend with your arms out like that, you’re asking for trouble and I don’t think anyone can have any complaints about this one.”

Comments from other judges: “Ryan Taylor is having a very good season but that was a stonewall penalty. What was his arm doing there?” & “Clear penalty absolutely no reason for his arm to be out like that.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Richards Penalty

A second penalty of the match for the blue side of Manchester and it was awarded when roles were reversed and Newcastle midfielder Hatem Ben Arfa tried to defend against City right back Micah Richards, the Frenchman, in the eyes of the referee resorting to dragging his man down in the area.

Simon: “Another definite penalty, as far as i’m concerned. Ben Arfa has no interest in trying to win the ball, not malicious, but Richards was definitely obstructed and the referee had no choice, but to award a second penalty to City.”

Ben: “Another easy decision for the referee and another bit of stupidity from a Newcastle player. You really need to be a lot smarter when you’re playing a team like City.”

Comments from other judges: “Sadly for Ben Arfa, who probably deserves a bit of luck, this was every bit as clear as the first penalty. Not a great position to be trying to make the challenge from. I’d want to know it’s Ben Arfa that’s back there trying to make that challenge from a Newcastle perspective. Correct decision though.” & “Easy penalty pretty much shoved him over and like most footballers tries to make it look like he did nothing wrong by falling over.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Wigan – Blackburn

Moses Penalty Shout

Wigan made a bright start to this game and Moses was lively throughout. The penalty shout came as a result of a brilliant surge into the area and past Pedersen, the Blackburn man seeming to trip the Wigan forward, but the referee waved play on.

Simon: “This was a shocker of a decision. I know it looks a little soft and the tackle was genuine enough, but the defender doesn’t get anywhere near the ball and clearly clips Moses, who can’t avoid going down. The referee is staring right at it and still misses it, shocking.”

Ben: “Simon has it spot on, it’s a terrible decision. It’s not always the case but if the referee genuinely doesn’t think there isn’t contact, then surely it’s a dive and a booking?”

Comments from other judges: “The referee is right on top of this one. How can he not give it? Does he bottle it? I don’t know. Fairly sure Pedersen tries to get his foot on the ball and is beaten by Moses’ pace but, come on. If that’s not a penalty, nothing is.” & “No attempt on the ball and a clear penalty could be the worst decision of the season so far.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision

Dunn Tackles

David Dunn received his marching orders early in the second half, a series of fouls leaving the referee with no choice. However, might the challenge that earnt him his first yellow have deserved a straight red?

Simon: “I actually thought the first tackle was worth a red card, it was high, late and malicious so I wouldn’t have been surprised to see the referee send him off for it. The second was clumsy and desperate, the red fully deserved, but I think he probably should have walked earlier in the game.”

Ben: “Unlike Simon, I don’t think the first was a red card. It’s becoming a cliché but an orange would have done for this one. Personally, I think a yellow was the correct call. The second was also a yellow, not a smart tackle to make when you’re on a yellow and 2-1 down in a game you really need something from.”

Comments from other judges: “Not a lot to say on these. Both challenges easily worth of yellow cards, which is what they got.” & “I thought that both of these were yellow cards the first one was very close to a red but I would have given a yellow.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Hoilett Goal

As bizarre a goal as you are ever likely to see. Blackburn forward Yakubu placed the ball on the corner spot and made his way into the area, Gamst-Pedersen approached the ball as if to take the corner, but decided to dribble it towards the edge of the area before crossing for Hoilett to score. Had Yakubu touched the ball or was Andre Mariner, who had his back to the ball and players throughout, duped?

Simon: “Without any shadow of a doubt, the worst refereeing decision of the season, so far. Mariner has his back to Yakubu as he places the ball at the corner flag, next thing he turns round and Pedersen is running along with the ball, never mind anything else, he should have been ordering that it be retaken because he wasn’t ready! Shame on Pedersen for doing something so cynical, but in a time when you expect players to do the right thing you have to hope that you have officials who can right their wrongs, on this occasion Mariner didn’t. A truly pathetic piece of refereeing.”

Ben: “Simon has pretty much covered this entirely and I don’t have much to add. I’m not sure Mariner can have any idea of what just happened, so he should be forcing a re-take of the corner. I’m not even sure that Yakubu touched the ball so how could the referee be sure? Even if a touch did come, the ball didn’t move in the slightest – the corner technically wasn’t taken by Yakubu and so Pederson broke the rules by taking the corner and then taking another touch.”

Comments from other judges: “With the Moses incident and then this, you wonder if this referee might be deserving of a demotion, at least temporarily. Rarely do refereeing errors make me feel angry. Frustration is usually the worst it gets. But this is plain incompetence. Even if Yakubu touches it, it’s clear the referee hasn’t blown his whistle to allow the corner to be taken. He’s not ready. The fact is that Yakubu didn’t touch it. Pathetic.” & “I am all for clever play in football and if Yakubu had of actually touched the ball I would have allowed the goal to stand but he didn’t touch it. An awful piece of refereeing.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision

Robinson Penalty

A last minute push in search of an equaliser and Paul Robinson, the Blackburn goalkeeper, made his way into the area to add an extra man. He found himself in the middle of the action when the ball broke towards him and launched forward to head the ball towards goal, connecting with the raised boot of a defender attempting to clear the ball, a penalty awarded for dangerous play from the Wigan defender.

Simon: “You hear a lot of talk about high feet in Europe and quite often you don’t think their opinion of a high foot should be classed a free kick, let alone a penalty, not so with this one. The Wigan player raises his foot and jumps a little, dangerous play and a definite penalty.”

Ben: “It was a dangerous clearance – as Paul Robinson found out – and the Wigan player’s foot was way to high so it was a definite penalty.”

Comments from other judges: “Okay, so Robinson is stooping to get his head to the ball, but still, his head ain’t that low. You can’t put your studs up in the air like that and then connect with a guy’s head and expect to get away with it.” & “The worst “tackle” of the season you simply cannot kick someone in the head and expect to get away with it. Should have also been sent in my eyes this was a very very poor attempt to get the ball.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Stoke – QPR

Pennant Penalty Shout

Simon: “Meh, seen them given, but there was minimal contact and Pennant could easily have played on. Had this been given I think I probably would have said it was harsh, so i’m going to say the referee got this one right.”

Ben: “I think this one is a penalty, there doesn’t need to be a lot of contact made to bring down Pennant in this situation and he has every right to hit the deck. Stoke unlucky on this one, for a change.”

Comments from other judges: “Pretty clear penalty to me. Maybe not a massive amount of contact, but there is enough. Pretty foolish to wag your leg at Pennant like that.” & “Very little contact and Pennant could have stayed on his feet, no penalty for me.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision

Helguson Goal DisallowedA big standard offside call from the referee’s assistant, Helguson straying a yard or two beyond the last man before netting and didn’t contest the decision.

Simon: “He’s a good yard or so offside and he knows it, very little argument (if any), correct decision.”

Ben: “Easy decision, Helguson was clearly offside.”

Comments from other judges: “When the ball is played through to Helguson, he does look offside.” & “Not much to say clearly off side.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Everton – Wolves

Edwards PenaltyWolves with the ball in the Everton area and Edwards takes a touch past Fellaini before hitting the deck as a result of a late tackle from the Everton midfielder. With the foul occurring right on the edge of the area the obvious debate arose, was it inside or not?

Simon: “I saw a lot of talk on Twitter about people being unsure as to whether it was in the box or not….it was definitely in the box and it was definitely a foul. Hoenstly don’t know how anyone could argue with this one, a clumsy tackle.”

Ben: “I think this is a penalty but only just. Edwards makes sure that contact is made but Fellaini does cut across him so it’s just about the right decision.”

Comments from other judges: “Clumsy challenge by Fellaini. You see this quite a lot. A player thinks he can get a foot on the ball but the other player’s pace deceives him and the result is (or should be) a penalty.” & “Stupid challenge by Felliaini, easily in the area and a sure fire penalty.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Cahill Penalty ShoutAs Everton pushed forward in search of a winner there were calls for a penalty when Cahill appeared to be pulled back and impeded as the ball came into the area. The referee didn’t see anything in it and play continued, despite Cahill’s protests.

Simon: “This is a tough one to call, the camera angle is really bad and whilst it looks like there might be a tug, it also looks a bit like the defender has placed his arm on Cahill and Cahill has thrown himself to the ground. I’m going to bottle this one and say that I can’t tell one way or the other, which shows the limitations of making decisions based on replays.”

Ben: “I’m not sure but I think there is a tug, enough of one to impede Cahill. He perhaps makes the most of it and that’s probably what makes up the referee’s mind in the end. I’ll say it should have been a penalty but can totally see why it wasn’t given.”

Comments from other judges: “I’d have given this one. Looks like a push in the box to me.” & “No penalty just a coming together I don’t think Cahill was fouled at all.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision

Everton PenaltyThe Everton winner came from the spot, a penalty awarded for a foul in the area as the game neared it’s end. As is so often the case, the foul came as a result of players pushing and pulling other players as a corner is taken, something we want to see less of, but something that doesn’t always get punished.

Simon: “We’ve seen an awful lot of these over recent weeks and a significant majority of the penalties in the Premier League seem to come from players holding onto or shoving opposition in the area when defending a set piece. Begs the questions, why don’t they learn from their mistakes? However, I thought this one was soft and wouldn’t have been surprised to see play waved on.”

Ben: “This was a very soft one and could have sympathised if it wasn’t given but I think it’s probably the right decision. It’s one of those where the defender knows that he usually gets away with a little shove but that doesn’t make it any less of a foul.”

Comments from other judges: “By the same token, I’d have given this one. There’s enough in the push for me.” & “To give this would be even softer than giving one to Cahill so no penalty for me, got to ask the question of why did the referee give this one and not the first one, was he trying to make up for what he felt was a mistake in not awarding one earlier on?”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

WBA – Bolton

Thomas Goal OffsideA through ball and a late run led the obvious calls of offside, Thomas continuing on and slotting it home, the linesman keeping his flag down and awarding the goal.

Simon: “Long was offside, no doubt about that, but equally no about Thomas being onside when the ball is played.”

Ben: “Thomas was definitely onside so the goal stands. If you make the argument that Long is interfering with an opponent, then you may as well take the offside rule back to how it was before this grey area was introduced.”

Comments from other judges: “Shane Long is in an offside position when the ball is played but he plays no role in the goal whatsoever. Thomas is onside the entire time.” & “Brilliantly timed run and way onside.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Muamba PenaltyBolton were awarded a penalty when Thomas appeared to obstruct Muamba in the West Brom penalty area. One train of thought was that Thomas was shielding the ball and had every right to do so, but another was that he was using illegal measures to make sure Muamba didn’t get to the ball first.

Simon: “This is a very similar incident to the Suarez penalty and it’s Thomas involved once again. On that occasion he seemed to be more interested in blocking the player than clearing the ball and this is exactly the same, pushing Muamba rather than getting rid of the danger. Poor defending and definite penalty, in my opinion.”

Ben: “I really wasn’t sure about this a first so I think it’s a very good decision from the referee. Even upon viewing the replay for the first time, I wasn’t convinced but upon looking closer it’s Thomas’ body shape which tells me it was the correct decision. He’s simply trying to block Muamba off and does so successfully, unfortunately for him, the referee spotted the infringement.”

Comments from other judges: “Looks like two players coming together, this one. If anything, Muamba appears to come from behind Thomas and collide with him. Admittedly there is a bit of a lean from Thomas and it’s not exactly A1 defending. Still, I think it’s a bit of a soft penalty to give.” & “I cannot see how this was a penalty at all another very bad referring decision of the weekend.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Long Penalty ShoutWith the clock ticking down and West Brom on course for victory they had a call to extend their lead from the spot denied. Irish striker Shane Long’s surge into the area was ended by David Wheater who appeared to use more force than necessary to wrestle the attacker off the ball, the referee felt that Long was giving as good as he got and played on.

Simon: “They are both going at each other here, both have handfuls of each other’s shirt and both shoving/pulling the other away from the ball. However, Long is the one in control of the ball and he’s dragged to the ground, in the area, by the defender, as far as i’m concerned this should have been given as a penalty.”

Ben: “Should have been a penalty but I again I wasn’t sure at first so I can sympathise with the officials. Having said that, Wheater simply has no interest in winning the ball, he’s more focussed on pushing Long away from it. I think he is saved from the viewing angles of the officials who probably can’t see clearly what was going on.”

Comments from other judges: “If I was Long, I’d feel a little aggrieved. Wheater seems to wrestle him off the ball. In the end, Wheater might play a little bit of the ball once their on the ground, but I think a penalty would have been fair for the way he grappled Long off the ball in the first place.” & “A bit of give and take from both players but in the end Long is hauled over should have been a penalty.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision