So, this penalty

[Slim]

How is there any question, are we saying Milner dived?

No one's saying that Beefy. Football's a contact game, it's not either a foul or a dive, there's clearly a middle ground.

One of the fallbacks for the ill-informed, football is not a contact sport, it's a limited-contact sport. Meaning in short, there is no amount of incidental contact that can be made that the ref can't, if warranted in his opinion, give a freekick/penalty for.

.

So it is a contact sport then, in the same way if you have 'limited' oranges you still have oranges. If a player goes down it's not necessarily a dive or a penalty/free kick. There is a middle ground where a player goes down from fair contact. Not saying that's what this was as my view was that it was a soft penalty but can understand it being given.

No, it's like saying if you have limited oranges, it means you are talking about fruit and crappy analogies and should probably remove yourself from the football forum.

But if you insist, it's like saying if you have 'limited' oranges, you in fact, have bananas. Which are oranges that obey different rules, such as being yellow and not being a fruit. Read the rules on limited contact, which is the same degree of contact allowed in running and netball.

Or to put it another way, and without the use of analogies, a contact sport in one in which you can tackle the man, a limited-contact sport is one in which contact has to be incidental as a result of you playing and winning the ball. Did he play the ball? No, shoulder to shoulder? Don't give a fuck, under the rules of the game, he initiated player to player contact and that's a foul. Inside the penalty box is a penalty.

Do I think the rules should be updated for the game today? Yes. Is it a foul under the current rules? Yes. Soft? No such fucking thing.

[Beefymcfc]

.....Jagielka's leg thumps into Milner between the hip and knee knocking him out of his stride. There was no way Jagileka could get the ball from where he was and he stopped Milner getting it.....

Correct. The rules are oh so simple, it's the opinion that seems to differ.

When I seen it on MotD I had no thought other than a penalty yet I was soon questioning myself as the brains trust told the world that it was no way a penalty, and this was from Shearer.

Perhaps the truth is that once Sergio went off they were looking back for their headline of 'One Man Team' which they soon turned to with the 'Couldn't score from open play' line.

I also note that Milner took a hell of an elbow from Gaz Baz but it wasn't even shown yet on the other hand, they seemed to show any foul that we made.

Anyway, back to the penalty. It was a penalty because the ref said so.

City 1 v 0 Everton. 3 points in the bag, now just 3 behind. That'll do me.

[Mikhail Chigorin]

Surefire penalty all day long. No argument about it. Full stop; move on to next topic.

[Tokyo Blue]

The only way it can be within the laws is if it is with the shoulder. It is not shoulder, it is a body check, so it is a foul and no amount of wishful thinking by pundits and journalists can change that fact.

[City64]

Of course it was a penalty . We had a stonewalled not given at Southampton last week by that blind cunt and at least 4 v the rags FFS !!! Get a fucking grip and fuck Rednapp he is a fucking prick of the highest order .


# 3 pts

[Moonchesteri]

I seriously don't think it was a penalty.

The contact was shoulder to shoulder.

Milner ended up on the deck but did not appeal and got up to play on.

Never a pen for me but hey we get one of these once a lifetime so I'll take it.

Spot on this post imo.

[Beefymcfc]

I seriously don't think it was a penalty.

The contact was shoulder to shoulder.

Milner ended up on the deck but did not appeal and got up to play on.

Never a pen for me but hey we get one of these once a lifetime so I'll take it.

Spot on this post imo.

Shoulder-to-shoulder? I can understand people having varying opinions but when they are blind, well.

[Nigels Tackle]

I seriously don't think it was a penalty.

The contact was shoulder to shoulder.

Milner ended up on the deck but did not appeal and got up to play on.

Never a pen for me but hey we get one of these once a lifetime so I'll take it.

Spot on this post imo.

Shoulder-to-shoulder? I can understand people having varying opinions but when they are blind, well.

maybe they teach biology differently in oz?

[Moonchesteri]

I seriously don't think it was a penalty.

Milner ended up on the deck but did not appeal and got up to play on.

Never a pen for me but hey we get one of these once a lifetime so I'll take it.

Spot on this post imo.

Shoulder-to-shoulder? I can understand people having varying opinions but when they are blind, well.

Lol. I actually missed that bit!

The remaining part is what I agree with and how I saw the incident.
However, some posters have had very good arguments for the penalty which I find myself agreeing with

[Ted Hughes]

I seriously don't think it was a penalty.

The contact was shoulder to shoulder.

Milner ended up on the deck but did not appeal and got up to play on.

Never a pen for me but hey we get one of these once a lifetime so I'll take it.

Spot on this post imo.

So in this video, you are both saying that Jagielka's shoulder against Milner's shoulder, is what causes the problem, & not Jagielka's hip & thigh going across Milner ?

It's easy enough to stop the video & look at the position of his body when Milner is still upright. Seems to me, Jagielka has his hip & left leg in front of Milner's, & his shoulder behind. Looks like he is sticking out his right leg to try & get the ball to me, & fails quite terribly. He deffo goes for the ball with his right foot. That's what the ref has seen.

You can look at that & see it as purely a shoulder to shoulder charge ?

Look at the replay at 014. It actually looks as if he's got the ball with his right foot from that angle (but he hasn't). I don't see any case for anyone to say it's a shoulder charge. It's a total fuckup. It's careless shite from Jagielka & it got what it deserved.

The lower angles don't show the impact on Milner very well, but if you look at the higher angle at 028ish, you can see that he gives Milner quite a bump, but not with the shoulder.

Watch on youtube.com

[london blue 2]

Looks like jimmy played for it, realised it was soft as fuck and decided to get on with it only to look up and see the ref point to the spot.

It would be good to keep this thread going to see if this limited contact stuff rears its head when a decision like that goes against us.

[Ted Hughes]

Looks like jimmy played for it, realised it was soft as fuck and decided to get on with it only to look up and see the ref point to the spot.

It would be good to keep this thread going to see if this limited contact stuff rears its head when a decision like that goes against us.

It won't happen like that against us, ever, because the player will chuck himself over & leave everybody in no doubt.

How many penalties are actual genuine fouls which cause the player to genuinely fall over ? I'd say about 20% The rest are players 'feeling contact' & dropping to the ground; they often freely admit it.

We get somene knocks our player over, who doesn't even dive, just gets on with the game, & people are looking for reasons why we shouldn't have a pen for it.

There is absolutely no point in not diving these days. If Milner had chucked himself over Jagielka's leg, nobody anywhere would be questioning it. Why should Jagielka get away with that ? It's shite. It's his fault. He makes contact with Milner & he doesn't get the ball. He is the one to blame, not Milner or the ref. It's fucking dreadful. I don't get why people are making excuses for it.

[blues2win]

Jimmy's not a cheat and tries to stay on his feet and people say he shouldn't get a penalty for it. Ridiculous.

[london blue 2]

I don't think anyone anywhere has blamed Milner. I think people (rightly IMO and wrong in yours) think it was soft and we were lucky.

We were also lucky that mangala didn't get a red and also possibly fernando. The ref appeared to favour the "big team".

No complaints from me though. :)

[Ted Hughes]

I don't think anyone anywhere has blamed Milner. I think people (rightly IMO and wrong in yours) think it was soft and we were lucky.

We were also lucky that mangala didn't get a red and also possibly fernando. The ref appeared to favour the "big team".

No complaints from me though. :)

What I mean is that they are ALL 'soft'. Hardly any are real penalties, even free kicks just people going down when they feel 'contact'.

If that challenge was made on a striker, nobody would question it as they make it much more than it is.

Watch on youtube.com

Watch on youtube.com

There would be no debate if it had been one of those characters.They would have seen Jagielka coming & fucking milked it. The only doubt is because Milner didn't.

[london blue 2]

Fair point. Gareth and didi were two of the best at winning those ridiculously soft freekicks. Shame our game is so soft

[Slim]

Looks like jimmy played for it, realised it was soft as fuck and decided to get on with it only to look up and see the ref point to the spot.

It would be good to keep this thread going to see if this limited contact stuff rears its head when a decision like that goes against us.

By all means you do that, and please point out my post that is outraged when Aguero not only got hacked down by Fonte but also got booked for diving because of it.

You take your lumps when they come, you sure as hell don't jump up and down when it goes our way.

[Wooders]

Hold on a minute..

Bananas aren't a fruit?

[Bridge'srightfoot]

Hold on a minute..

Bananas aren't a fruit?

They're a 'limited' fruit. The fact they're fruit is incidental.

[Slim]

Hold on a minute..

Bananas aren't a fruit?

They're a 'limited' fruit. The fact they're fruit is incidental.

I think that would be a great username for you to post under. Although not sure if I mean "limited" or "incidental" as you certainly fit both extremely well.