side of the defensive team. Within this portion of the debate, I don't think a penalty should have been given. It's far too
Damski, post: 908759, member: 5411"]Right then gentlemen, I've had a busy weekend and Monday, so I'm sorry to join this thread on the 11th page, but I'm here to tell you all
why that penalty was bullshit.
A major point of the discussion so far has been about the contact from Hammond. It has been about how much contact constitutes "reckless" behaviour. My view is that it was ambiguous at best. Hammond was victim of poor judgement with the timing? Sure. Hammond did not need to make the tackle? Absolutely. However, the tackle had clearly ran out of steam by the time he came into contact with Memphis, and he clearly attempted to take the sting out of it himself by bending his knee. For me - that is not what I would describe as "reckless." It is poorly timed, unnecessary, a silly, rash decision, but it is not reckless. This is a decision for the referee that can go either way. It is in no way a "nailed on" penalty.
Football is a semi-contact sport. This means that categorically, it is not
always a foul if there is contact in the box and no winning of the ball. There is ambiguity, which is reflected in the rules. The referee is required to exercise discretion based on the guidelines set out by the rules of the game, and if in doubt, in matters of awarding a penalty, is required to err on the side of the defensive team. Within this portion of the debate, I don't think a penalty should have been given. It's far too ambiguous.
The thing is though, that entire discussion is trumped by a far more important issue - Memphis committed a foul by reacting to the tackle in the way that he did. It is abundantly clear that the tackle did not warrant the reaction Memphis gave. There is absolutely no way that the contact from Hammond would have naturally resulted in Memphis reacting in that way.
Therefore he dived. The key point here is - Would the referee have given a penalty if Memphis had not reacted in such an over the top way? It is clear that Memphis was play acting
in order to influence the referee's decision. This is defined as simulation in the rules of the game, and is expressly forbidden.
A good way of explaining this is to picture a player receiving the ball in an offside position, then subsequently being fouled by a poor tackle in the penalty box. He would not receive a penalty kick for his team, as he was already violating the laws of the game when he was fouled. It's the same case here. Memphis
forfeited his right to win a penalty when he simulated, because what he did
is a foul in itself. The tackle on it's own, in my opinion, is open for debate as to whether it constitutes a penalty. The tackle, with subsequent play acting from Memphis? That's a yellow card for simulation, and a free kick to the defending team, as explicitly laid out in the laws of the game.
This is all before we get on to the subjects of refereeing bias towards bigger clubs, the fact that John Moss is a Premier League referee and therefore has a much stronger professional relationship with Manchester United, the fact that this was in front of the Stretford End in the 93rd minute, the fact that John Moss would have received a hail of criticism for not giving the penalty, and the fact that Manchester United were under immense pressure to win the tie. All of which contributed to John Moss pointing to the penalty spot, a very convenient decision for him to have to make. Big clubs get all the breaks, and everything was put in place for the top Premier League club to go through to the next round.
It's not something that will keep me awake at night; personally I believe Adkins threw the game when he subbed off Sharp. I think we actually would have won the game if he had subbed Sammon for Done around 70 minutes, got Adams to eat up all that space going begging on the left wing and stretch the game. But he made the decision to defend a 0-0 and take it to a replay. Which I respect, as Bramall Lane on a cold Tuesday night suits us way more than them, and it's more money, more exposure, more time for us to embarrass possibly the worst Manchester United side in my lifetime. As it happens, we almost did just that. And you know, 3rd round of the FA Cup, who cares that much? We have a far more important game tomorrow night. Onwards and upwards. Let's get into the play-off slots. But I think we need to be very clear on this. Memphis explicitly broke the laws of the game, which
directly resulted in his team winning the tie. That's called cheating.
So, not a penalty then?
.
