2017/18 Oumar Niasse

[kenada_blue]

Like anything similar to retrospective bans, who reports the incident?

The ref in his report? 4th official? Or a bunch of pundits?

 

[davek]

In defence the club should put forward a highlights clip of Alexis Sanchez at Goodison the other week.

Seems this panel only get involved when Match of the Day do.

Spot on.

And MOTM2. And also ITV's panel.

That is very worrying too given that Dixon, Murphy and Sinclair are regulars as pundits and also on the diving panels.

That has to be influencing other panelists and it's a conflict of interest.

Solution: kick the pious gets out of their lucrative punters jobs...I'm sure they'd suddenly lose all passion for their diving panel crusade then.

 

[davek]

Like anything similar to retrospective bans, who reports the incident?

The ref in his report? 4th official? Or a bunch of pundits?

First off an opposition player needs to squeal like a rat. In this case that streak of Kopite piss, Dann.

 

[kenada_blue]

Whether he dived or not aside, and he clearly did, there's a bigger issue here for me.

Why's he being given a 2 game ban if guilty? Had the referee made this decision, it would have been a yellow card.

I know a penalty changes the game, but why should he be punished much more harshly just because the ref's got it wrong? This goes for all incidents involving all players. Get caught at the time? Yellow. Ref gets it wrong? 2 game ban. Makes no sense.

Well, look at the game last night. Murray should've got the most blatant penalty you'll see this season...yet the ref and lino say no, and give a goal kick even though the ball didn't even go out of play.

But we put that to bed as a "mistake" by 2 people that could've cost Brighton the game.

 

[tim cahill]

What baffles me about this decision is that it gives a green light to defenders impeding strikers with their upper body. Whether they are competing for the ball or not.

There was no attempt to play the ball from Dann. He just barged Niasse off the ball. Are they saying that is okay?

 

[sportset]

The GOOD guys are always the fall guys!!!!!!

 

[davek]

What baffles me about this decision is that it gives a green light to defenders impeding strikers with their upper body. Whether they are competing for the ball or not.

There was no attempt to play the ball from Dann. He just barged Niasse off the ball. Are they saying that is okay?

Yes, defo this. And also cutting across the line of a forward's run just enough make them aware that line has been denied them.

It's a move that rolls back some of the advantage allowed attacking play built up over the years that's seen a reduction in cynicism. This reverses the process.

 

[roydo]

I think the charge is that Niasse "obviously" tried to get the pen with a daft dive. The dive was, imo, a dive. He was fouled/impeded, but he is deemed to be guilty of a crap dive.

Thats all I can concur from all this.

Buts its a thin end of a wedge this.

 

[ToffeeTim]

Phil Neville is a prick

 

[tim cahill]

I think the charge is that Niasse "obviously" tried to get the pen with a daft dive. The dive was, imo, a dive. He was fouled/impeded, but he is deemed to be guilty of a crap dive.

Thats all I can concur from all this.

Buts its a thin end of a wedge this.

They need to start giving penalties when strikers don’t go to ground then.

 

[billyblue80]

So usually it's a yellow but because the media kicked up a fuss he might get a two game ban. Ridiculous inconsistentcy.

 

[davek]

I think the charge is that Niasse "obviously" tried to get the pen with a daft dive. The dive was, imo, a dive. He was fouled/impeded, but he is deemed to be guilty of a crap dive.

Thats all I can concur from all this.

Buts its a thin end of a wedge this.

We're into the realms of ice skating and judging artistic impression if that's the criteria.

Was he impeded? Yes.
Was there contact? Yes.


Everything else is just perception.

 

[TheBigIguana]

They need to start giving penalties when strikers don’t go to ground then.

Basically this. The whole situation is avoided if Oumar can run into Dann put his hands up in the air to complain he's been blocked off without diving and have a prayer of getting the call. But he has no shot at that so it's either dive or just give up on an attack when you've beaten one of the last defenders.

 

[Tubey]

What baffles me about this decision is that it gives a green light to defenders impeding strikers with their upper body. Whether they are competing for the ball or not.

There was no attempt to play the ball from Dann. He just barged Niasse off the ball. Are they saying that is okay?

Exactly.

Get on this streak of piss from Gallagher for Sky: http://www.skysports.com/football/n...-foul-on-alexis-sanchez-says-dermot-gallagher

 

[roydo]

They need to start giving penalties when strikers don’t go to ground then.

I agree. Its been an utter shambles for ages. Just typical we get pinged first.

Like pretty much everyone says there was contact. Tons of pundits and media folk have said contact equals foul equals penalty. But it seems if the crash to the floor isnt that great, then everything is reversed.

Dont really get the logic really.