Gary O'Neil

[1889]

The problem lies with the Laws of the game always has done and always will do. Under Law 12 Fouls and misconduct you have the does or attempts for example kick or attempts to kick. That straight away leads to grey areas, the referee then has to make a decision as to whether the player has been infringed as above or has simulated which is a fine line. In theory there aren’t enough direct free kicks/penalties. The amount of times you will hear in the stands or sidelines at a Sunday League game “he didn’t touch him ref” he doesn’t have to in theory for it to be a free kick. The isn’t in the opinion of the referee if you take off the red and white specs every now and then you can see it’s the correct decision but from one angle to another it’s amazing how much that changes. Back of the Kop after 10 pints you are guessing with the crowd, the officials “aren’t as bad” as many think

But I’m not talking about real time incidents and complicating the already complex systems we have in place. I’m suggesting the players guilty of blatant simulation, should be retrospectively punished with a 4 game ban.

I’m not talking about the ambiguous did he didn’t he situations? I’m referring to the Rivaldo type of simulation, the obvious dives where there’s clearly been absolutely no contact and the players going down holding their face when they’ve been pushed in the chest, that sort of incident. There are hundreds of examples and more every weekend. What’s more I’d upgrade simulation from a yellow card to a straight red.

If the refereeing authorities and Footballs governing bodies, had the will to impose harsher penalties, it would stop overnight.

 

[Greenwich Blade]

It was a ridiculous decision to give the pen. We’d have been equally livid had it gone against us. At least O’Neill volunteers an opinion and calls out shite officiating.

Some of these Premier League clowns will end up costing us vital points this season. It’s great we won, but some sense of perspective PLEASE FFS!

"Too much bloody perspective."

In my opinion it wasn't a ridiculous decision to give the penalty.

And for the record, I am livid at EVERY penalty decision that goes against us, but am highly delighted at every one that goes for us. That's football fandom (in my opinion).

 

[AWetFlannel]

"Too much bloody perspective."

In my opinion it wasn't a ridiculous decision to give the penalty.

And for the record, I am livid at EVERY penalty decision that goes against us, but am highly delighted at every one that goes for us. That's football fandom (in my opinion).

The hope is that you can do both, at the game you scream for the pen, outraged if you don't get it and pile pressure on the ref.

After on the forum with 20 angles and slow motion, we can all admit it was never a pen. We're due a bit of luck and deserved it anyway, it's no tragedy.

 

[LBA_Blade]

But I’m not talking about real time incidents and complicating the already complex systems we have in place. I’m suggesting the players guilty of blatant simulation, should be retrospectively punished with a 4 game ban.

I’m not talking about the ambiguous did he didn’t he situations? I’m referring to the Rivaldo type of simulation, the obvious dives where there’s clearly been absolutely no contact and the players going down holding their face when they’ve been pushed in the chest, that sort of incident. There are hundreds of examples and more every weekend. What’s more I’d upgrade simulation from a yellow card to a straight red.

If the refereeing authorities and Footballs governing bodies, had the will to impose harsher penalties, it would stop overnight.

i totally agree with you on the harsher punishments. Sometimes it’s the technicalities of it with that Brazil World Cup game Rivaldo clearly simulated same as Simone did against Beckham in ‘98. It’s whether the simulation is worse than the initial challenge so to speak which is often difficult, in the Beckham incident, yes he raised his foot but the reaction wasn’t justified. According to a times article written in 2020, there were an average of 25 cards given per season. Which is very low, the obvious ones I agree retrospectively should be upgraded to more or at least have a “suspended ban” so if you do it again you get x number of games.

The problem with a retrospective ban is you aren’t punishing the the game in question I guess, a straight red card would bring in VAR to look at, in obvious incidents it probably would stop if a direct red was given. But how is that written into the laws of the game. Football has become so technical it would be phrased in the opinion of the referee the player deliberately simulated to try and win a free kick or words to that effect. Then you have the opinion of the referee bringing games into not dispute but different opinions. If we both had 10 tackles to referee viewing trying to keep up with play, no VAR I can guarantee we wouldn’t agree on all 10. Even with VAR it is dependent on what the referee has done up to now. The job of VAR in most cases is more of any reason why I shouldn’t give rather than WTF has gone on, I didn’t see it give me the right call, which again is why football and VAR still need to work out where that technology fits in modern football.

 

[1889]

i totally agree with you on the harsher punishments. Sometimes it’s the technicalities of it with that Brazil World Cup game Rivaldo clearly simulated same as Simone did against Beckham in ‘98. It’s whether the simulation is worse than the initial challenge so to speak which is often difficult, in the Beckham incident, yes he raised his foot but the reaction wasn’t justified. According to a times article written in 2020, there were an average of 25 cards given per season. Which is very low, the obvious ones I agree retrospectively should be upgraded to more or at least have a “suspended ban” so if you do it again you get x number of games.

The problem with a retrospective ban is you aren’t punishing the the game in question I guess, a straight red card would bring in VAR to look at, in obvious incidents it probably would stop if a direct red was given. But how is that written into the laws of the game. Football has become so technical it would be phrased in the opinion of the referee the player deliberately simulated to try and win a free kick or words to that effect. Then you have the opinion of the referee bringing games into not dispute but different opinions. If we both had 10 tackles to referee viewing trying to keep up with play, no VAR I can guarantee we wouldn’t agree on all 10. Even with VAR it is dependent on what the referee has done up to now. The job of VAR in most cases is more of any reason why I shouldn’t give rather than WTF has gone on, I didn’t see it give me the right call, which again is why football and VAR still need to work out where that technology fits in modern football.

I get what you’re saying about retrospective punishment, not benefiting the opponent in the actual game, but the object of the exercise must surely be to stamp it out altogether. If coaches were without two of their best players for the following four games, they’d quickly sit up and take notice, as would their peers.

In regards to the wording, I thought there already existed a law in regard to simulation, I’d just like the punishment for that, to be increased to a red. As you say it is a law that is very seldom enforced

 

[Freddie]

Absolute wind up merchant you...or a shorter masquerading as a Blade?

*snorter Hi, Diplodocus here.

 

[LBA_Blade]

I get what you’re saying about retrospective punishment, not benefiting the opponent in the actual game, but the object of the exercise must surely be to stamp it out altogether. If coaches were without two of their best players for the following four games, they’d quickly sit up and take notice, as would their peers.

In regards to the wording, I thought there already existed a law in regard to simulation, I’d just like the punishment for that, to be increased to a red. As you say it is a law that is very seldom enforced

The wording is definitely there, using the wording simulation, all it would need would to switch categories to red from yellow, good shout about the more times it happens the less likely it will happen in the future etc

 

[Bladezz]

Let it go. We’re keeping the three points.

I said multiple times I’m over the moon with it. The narrative behind the performance is what I’m discussing.

We kept ourselves in the game first half which is why we got the points.

 

[shorehamview]

Mate look at any stats and they outperformed us.

……..absolutely everything was in their favour.…….

I’ve looked at the only stats that matter, and we appear to have scored one more goal than they did.

 

[Charlieblade]

O’Neil has not attended the public relations/press handling course.

Do not cry on camera, and do not complain about referees. Take the result and accept the outcome in public.

I don’t expect him to smile when his team is beaten by the club at the bottom of the league, but he gets much more credit for accepting things as they are.

 

[Inter_blade83]

O’Neil has not attended the public relations/press handling course.

Do not cry on camera, and do not complain about referees. Take the result and accept the outcome in public.

I don’t expect him to smile when his team is beaten by the club at the bottom of the league, but he gets much more credit for accepting things as they are.

By moaning about decisions such as this, it deflects from his own deficiencies. By accepting they were second best second half, that it was a pen, that the sub he brought on was a major point in us winning the game, he's accepting fault. His paymasters won't look kindly on that, given the nature of managerial changes in football. He'd be quickly out of work and on the scrap heap like Mark Hughes.

 

[Kev Gee]

The pen was soft as shit tbh. So he will moan about it.

However. We've been on the end of loads of bad calls over the last year or two. (Villa ghost goal for example) So about time we got one back.

 

[TopBoy]

It was never a penalty, but let's face it, 70% of those given aren't. We deserved the win on that second-half performance alone. Loved the no-fear attitude.

 

[LurkerBlade]

Don't like that it was a penalty, don't like the way the game as gone.

However, if that was a defender falling on the ball after that challenge (which we see every single week) it's being given as a foul and not a penalty for the "handball" afterwards.

Like many have said, O'Neill was saying we'd have 100's of fouls if they are being give, yet his team was given fouls EXACTLY like that one in the same match!

 

[Chimpan-A]

I'd be mardy if I had a mug like his tbf mate show a little compassion

If Craig Bellamy had an even uglier brother.

 

[1889]

The wording is definitely there, using the wording simulation, all it would need would to switch categories to red from yellow, good shout about the more times it happens the less likely it will happen in the future etc

Just watched Spurs v Chelsea. Sterling clearly dived after no contact, first half, clear as day then second half got clipped on the ankle and went down rolling about holding his right thigh, presumably as it was easier to reach?
Second half Pedro Porro dived no contact at all, clearly shown on the replay. No action taken by the ref?

Both in front of my retrospective panel, 4 game bans for both

 

[LBA_Blade]

Just watched Spurs v Chelsea. Sterling clearly dived after no contact, first half, clear as day then second half got clipped on the ankle and went down rolling about holding his right thigh, presumably as it was easier to reach?
Second half Pedro Porro dived no contact at all, clearly shown on the replay. No action taken by the ref?

Both in front of my retrospective panel, 4 game bans for both

100% agreed ban!

 

[sitwell]

Michael Brown absolutely despises him. Biggest wanker in football he said at the dinner I saw him at.

 

[Northyorksblade]

Change the names to "Stevie G, the Sheffield No 5 and Rob Styles then it wouldn't be made up

I think Isza is too young to remember.

 

[Rufus Smalls]

Just watched Spurs v Chelsea. Sterling clearly dived after no contact, first half, clear as day then second half got clipped on the ankle and went down rolling about holding his right thigh, presumably as it was easier to reach?
Second half Pedro Porro dived no contact at all, clearly shown on the replay. No action taken by the ref?

Both in front of my retrospective panel, 4 game bans for both

Stirling’s been a serial diver all his career, it’s pathetic.

 

[Broomhall Blade]

That fake one was 100% a foul Hamer had hold of him and almost swung him round
Boggles was outside the box
Ref ordering their player off with a cut lip for treatment then instructing him to go to the half way line before coming on meaning they played on down to 10

They played on for about 5 seconds he walked across the pitch and came straight back on when he reached the side line.

 

[ATL Recs]

They played on for about 5 seconds he walked across the pitch and came straight back on when he reached the side line.

From behind the goal direct in front it clearly looks as though Hamer pulls him back 100% but looking at the replay from a different angle slowed down its not as obvious yes Hamer has hold but not as dramatically as it looks face on

 

[Devils bump]

If your referring to the Hamer one which was 100% a free kick to them sure looked like he got a call in his ear

You need to lay off the Crack pipe mate,
Because the one you've described is currently doing the rounds on YouTube and Twatter, showing what a pathetic dive it was.
Absolutely embarrassing, but if that's how you 100% see things, Crack on.

 

[Booker4]

It was a ridiculous decision to give the pen. We’d have been equally livid had it gone against us. At least O’Neill volunteers an opinion and calls out shite officiating.

Some of these Premier League clowns will end up costing us vital points this season. It’s great we won, but some sense of perspective PLEASE FFS

If that had been against us I would have been disappointed but not livid because I can see why it was given. There was little need to make a challenge there, Baldock was going nowhere and was back to goal and near the edge of the box, it was silly from their player. Whenever you make a challenge on someone in the box you have to get it right, perfect, if not then you risk giving a pen away.

 

[1889]

You need to lay off the Crack pipe mate,
Because the one you've described is currently doing the rounds on YouTube and Twatter, showing what a pathetic dive it was.
Absolutely embarrassing, but if that's how you 100% see things, Crack on.

It was a blatant dive.

Yes, Hamer had his hands on his shoulders, but the Wolves player took that contact as justification to dive forward, as though he was starting the 100m freestyle at Ponds Forge.

It’s pure physics, If someone grabs your shoulders, you’d fall backwards, not be propelled forward.

 

[Ndiayewillalwaysloveyou]

Disallowed Wolves goal was correct decision - panel

The Key Match Incidents Panel, which reviews refereeing decisions, backs the decision to disallow Wolves' equaliser against West Ham.

www.bbc.co.uk

Wah wah wah shut up