Debatable Decisions : Week XIV – Part Two

Part Two of Week Fourteen covers Sunday and Monday’s games and despite the fact that only six teams were in action they….sorry, the officials, managed to provide us with an incredible eleven decisions to cover.

Wolves – Sunderland

Fletcher Header Over Line & Penalty ShoutTwo decisions for the price of one move. A Wolves corner and some pushing and pulling in the area might have resulted in a spot kick, when they weren’t awarded that the Wolves players decided to claim that Fletcher’s header had crossed the line before it was headed clear.

Simon M – “No on both counts, for me. It was a push, but not a penalty push, if that makes sense. It was more like jostling for position, rather than shoving someone in a foul sense and the ball definitely didn’t cross the line.”

Ben – “I initially thought that there was a foul but after seeing it again, I think the referee got it right, I also think the Wolves player makes a bit of a meal out of it. As for the ball being over the line, it wasn’t.”

Ant – “Not enough of a push for a penalty and the ball was clearly not over the line.”

Simon F – “I have to be consistent, and I’ve said that Spurs should have had a penalty for a blatant shove, so should Wolves. I think the assistant got it right in terms of the header not having crossed the line, but I do think penalty.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

O’Shea Penalty ShoutNot content with holding onto John O’Shea as a Sunderland corner was sent into the area, Christophe Berra then decided to give him a little push too. Both offences might have resulted in a penalty, the referee didn’t give anything for either.

Simon M – “Berra seems to pop up every week with one of these and as Ben says, he very rarely seems to get caught by the officials. I think this was a definite penalty and perhaps if one is given against him he’ll think twice in future.”

Ben – “Berra does this week in week out and gets away with it week in week out. He’s a master of defending using the ‘dark arts’. O’Shea throws himself down but the chance of a referee giving a penalty for this is already remote enough.”

Ant – “I don’t like these decisions as I find them hard to to call but I would say that this was no penalty.”

Simon F – “Christophe Berra isn’t the most subtle of defenders and this wasn’t the most subtle of actions. For me he definitely impedes O’Shea and a penalty should have been awarded.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision

Larsson Penalty ShoutIn one of the most talked about decisions of the weekend Sunderland were awarded a penalty for a trip on Larsson as he made his way into the area, replays seemed to show little too no contact between his leg and the man adjudged to have fouled him, Jody Craddock.

Simon M – “This was a particularly poor decision because of Dowd’s position. In the video we used to judge this you can see that he is 10 yards away with a clear view of the incident. Justice was done when Larsson missed it, but it was a terrible piece of refereeing.”

Ben – “This was hard to call the first time around so I won’t criticise the referee too much but Larsson clearly cheated based on replays. Craddock was pretty calm considering.”

Ant – “Here we have the cheat of the week and it seems every week we get to see one player dive for a penalty. The strange thing about this one is that if it was a foul it is outside the area anyway. Larsson dived as far as he could not only to con the referee into giving a foul but to also make sure it looked like he was fouled in the area, total embarrassment.”

Simon F – “Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it’s Sebastian Larsson and another incorrect Phil Down decision. A pathetic dive from Larsson which only furthers the call for retrospective punishment of such offences.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision

O’Hara HandballIn the build up to Wolves’ winning goal the ball was played into the area and chested/handled down by O’Hara into the path of Fletcher, the goal stood, but the Sunderland faithful were sure that it was more hand than chest.

Simon M – “It is quite close, so I cut the officials some slack for that, but given the amount of decisions they got wrong in this match I’m not sure they deserve it. With the benefit of a replay I feel that the goal should have been disallowed and Sunderland awarded a free kick.”

Ben – “I’m going to side with the ref on this one, handballs are so hard to call and I’m still not sure even after seeing multiple replays. It looks to me as though it hit O’Hara’s shoulder, rather than his hand or arm.”

Ant – “I think this was handball and O’Hara knew what he was doing.”

Simon F – “Dowd had a shocker, didn’t he. To be fair on this one, I can see how it was missed at full speed, but for me O’Hara has definitely played the ball with his arm and hasn’t tried to get his arm out of the way.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision

Stoke – Everton

Velios Penalty ShoutA chipped ball into the area with both defender and attacker playing back to goal, Huth clearly leans on Velios as he heads the ball clear, but was it enough to warrant a penalty? The referee didn’t think so.

Simon M – “Velios is a big lad, he could have challenged for the ball if he wanted. Huth has his arms on the Greek’s shoulders, but I don’t think it was a foul and a penalty would have been super harsh.”

Ben – “Huth had his hands on Velios but enough for a penalty kick? No for me.”

Ant – “Huth might lean on him a bit but no way was this a penalty.”

Simon F – “Although Huth has his arms on Velios’ shoulders, I don’t think he was preventing Velios from jumping for the ball.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Fellaini Penalty ShoutAn Everton corner and as is so often the case, the defender is trying his best not only to mark the forward, but manhandle him too. Shawcross clearly has hold of Fellaini throughout the set play and despite protests from the hairy Belgian no penalty was awarded.

Simon M – “I felt that the Berra foul warranted a penalty and I feel this one does too. The referee has a clear view and the player is bringing it to his attention, not sure how he missed it to be honest.”

Ben – “Tough one, Shawcross is doing a ‘Berra’ and maybe there is enough to put Fellaini off but I think a penalty would have been a very harsh call.”

Ant – “I doubt Felliani would have been complaining at all had his header been on target and in the goal no penalty for me.”

Simon F – “I’m sure Stoke would have judged it as harsh, but for me Shawcross has held Fellaini, and therefore a penalty should be awarded.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision

Cahill Penalty ShoutWith Sorensen off his line the Stoke defence decided to wait for him to come and collect a ball into the area, Cahill managed to nip in behind the defence in an attempt to get to the ball before the keeper, both collided and Cahill called for a penalty as Sorensen lay out cold on the ground.

Simon M – “I think Sorensen gets to this first, purely because of the direction the ball goes in. It’s a nasty coming together, no penalty and very, very brave goalkeeping.”

Ben – “The keeper doesn’t really know anything about this, I think he gets to the ball and Cahill seems to come from nowhere.”

Ant – “Nothing in this for me it is simply a collision and nothing more.”

Simon F – “If anything this should have been a foul against Cahill for jumping into Sorensen.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Fulham – Liverpool

Suarez Penalty ShoutThe Uruguayan caused the Fulham defence a lot of problems on Monday night and in this passage easily skinned Hangeland with a dink past the defender. Hangeland stood his ground and shifted into Suarez who went down claiming a penalty, which never came.

Simon M – “I’m going to say this is incorrect, not because it deserved a penalty, but because I agree with Simon, it’s obstruction and an indirect free kick should have been awarded. Hangeland deliberately blocks Suarez’s run.”

Ben – “Got to agree with Butch on this one, I think Suarez is doing his thing and looking for a penalty. There was no foul there.”

Ant – “No way was this a penalty, no wonder Suarez has a reputation for diving.”

Simon F – “At the time I was screaming for a penalty, but on reflection the referee was right not to give it. I do think the absolute correct decision would have been to award an indirect free kick as I think Hangeland has fairly blatantly obstructed Suarez.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Adam Penalty ShoutShowing a rare turn of pace, Adam burst towards goal only to be upended by a Senderos foul, but was it a free kick outside the area or a penalty inside?

Simon M – “Senderos knew what he was doing, but he was a very lucky boy that he managed to get his foul over and done with before Adam made it into the area. No penalty, in my book.”

Ben – “Senderos took one for the team, realising that he was in real trouble. He needed to make sure the foul happened outside the area and it did, therefore I think Friend got it spot on.”

Ant – “Very close to a penalty but not quite in the area.”

Simon F – “The initial contact clearly takes place outside the area, but as Graham Poll is so fond of reminding us, if the foul continues into the area then a penalty should be awarded.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

Suarez Disallowed GoalA similar disallowed effort to Wright-Phillips goal on Saturday, a dink over the defence, neat control from Suarez and a deft finish, but the linesman’s flag signalled it as no goal as they felt he had just strayed offside.

Simon M – “It isn’t as bad as the Wright-Phillips decisions, but it’s still wrong. The goal should have stood and Suarez, much as I dislike him, really is one of the most skilful players in the world and a joy to watch at times.”

Ben – “It was extremely close but Hangelaand just about played Suarez onside.”

Ant – “Suarez’s movement was excellent and he was just onside, it was however extremely close.”

Simon F – “Although I sympathise with assistants who are required to make such borderline decisions, Suarez is level with Hangeland when Enrique plays the ball and the goal should have stood.”

Overall Verdict: Incorrect Decision

Spearing Red Card

Fulham weren’t in a particularly dangerous position, but when the ball broke free in midfield that didn’t stop Liverpool youth graduate, Jay Spearing, launching into a must win tackle. He won the ball, of that there was no doubt, but the referee felt that he had gone in dangerously and a straight red card was shown.

Simon M – “No doubt about this one deserving a red card, an absolutely horrible tackle and had Dembélé not jumped it could have resulted in a serious injury. No idea what the Liverpool players were complaining about, their anger should have been directed at Spearing.”

Ben – “Looked a bad tackle at the time but I don’t think it was quite worthy of a red card. I’m almost certain that there was no malicious intent but there is an argument that the tackle was reckless, or rather, the follow-through was. I would have however given Spearing the benefit of my doubt, I think a yellow card would have been the correct decision.”

Ant – “I think the ref was right to send him off the follow through was bad both feet were off the ground. There is a picture on the social network sites that shows Spearing off the ground with his foot connecting studs first with the Fulham lads shin, could have broken bones.”

Simon F – “At full speed I was mystified as to why a red card had been shown, but on replay I think Kevin Friend got this one spot on. Spearing clearly wins the ball cleanly, but that matters not at all. After he has won the ball, both feet come off the ground and he clatters into Dembélé (who was lucky not to suffer serious injury). A textbook case of the “excessive force” rule.”

Overall Verdict: Correct Decision

You can follow all four judges on Twitter; Simon M – @Deb_Decisions, Ben – @0Neji, Ant – @Acidburn81 and Simon F – @SFurnivall.