Unsworth said this in his presser today. He said the referee had reviewed all the video evidence of the incident after the game and maintained that he had made the right decision. So his decision is being over-ruled by overpaid TV pundits with their own agendas.So I've just read that the referee watched it again and confirmed he still deemed there was enough contact for a pen?
The significance of "claiming" the penalty is that it reinforces the attempt to deceive the referee.
in fact, there should be a more severe punishment for a fellow whom claims after diving rip than for one whom doesn't.
Unsworth said this in his presser today. He said the referee had reviewed all the video evidence of the incident after the game and maintained that he had made the right decision. So his decision is being over-ruled by overpaid TV pundits with their own agendas.
Still remember a fault from Hibbert on him causing penalty and red card...barely any contact with the referee waiting on Gerard to tell him what to do!Steven Gerrard would have only played 10 games a season if this exaggerated contact rule was around in the past.
we should open a can of worms and take the matter to the european court of sports arbritation and make the fa beg for forgivenessUnsworth said this in his presser today. He said the referee had reviewed all the video evidence of the incident after the game and maintained that he had made the right decision. So his decision is being over-ruled by overpaid TV pundits with their own agendas.
The Clattenburg derby.Still remember a fault from Hibbert on him causing penalty and red card...barely any contact with the referee waiting on Gerard to tell him what to do!
I watched the match and a commentator's point was that if a player goes down and it is shown that there was no contact, heJust saw highlights of the WHU v Leic game.
So if a player gets slight contact and goes over (he dived) but, the ref isn't fooled by it, does that mean he doesn't get a ban and why didn't he get a yellow card?
I watched the match and a commentator's point was that if a player goes down and it is shown that there was no contact, he
can't be charged with diving if there was no penalty/free kick given or a sending off. I don't know if that's a correct interpretation but it makes a farce of the whole scenario and needs to be cleared up.