This was my view too.
Well, the penalty...?
- Thread starter kanchelskis14
- Start date
As pointed out already in this thread, Rooney hasn't dived before he contacts him. This 'trailing leg' that you're desperately clinging onto as the evidence of a dive is in fact the motion of him stretching for the ball, then at the same time Almunia clears him out.
I think we're talking about the same thing here - the trailing left foot turning over and dragging along the ground - except that you think it shows him losing his balance, while I suspect he's deliberately going to ground.
Either way, what's clear from this one -
The angle benefits your point of view there, if you look at it from the reverse Almunia's contact sends Rooney's body in a clockwise motion (impossible to achieve if he was diving, very possible if contact was there)
No way, his right foot is stretching for (and reaching) the ball, his left trails along the ground toe-down, there's no way he can get from that position to propelling himself onwards, he's in the process of going to ground.
Don't bother........anyone who does not think that was stonewall penalty is either stupid, myopic or perhaps both.
I think we're talking about the same thing here - the trailing left foot turning over and dragging along the ground - except that you think it shows him losing his balance, while I suspect he's deliberately going to ground.
Either way, what's clear from this one -
- is that it happens well before Almunia reaches him
This is the crucial point. I don't think it's inconsequential, because I reckon he dived, and if so, that's an offence which (I think) takes priority over Almunia's action.
How can it be a dive, given as that back foot gets stuck in the ground and brought forward with his momentum, he's still going for the ball and there's no give in that front foot until he gets clattered?
If a players diving, it's the leg closest to the player they're faking contact with that they drag and go down with
Either way, what you 'reckon' isn't what the ref thought, and it's his interpretation that matters. And interpretation is all it can be, as you said before only Rooney would know there if he dived
For me, as others have said, he knows what he's doing in winning the penalty, getting to the ball first knowing Almunia is about to clatter him. But that's not diving, it's something very different. Something entirely fair
For about the eight millionth time, no-one is denying that 'contact was there' - Almunia clattered into him. That contact indeed changed his direction (not that contact would even be necessary for a foul to be given - see the Laws).
The question is whether he dived before Almunia hit him. This new angle certianly swings me back towards thinking he did.
probably from the Bremner Hunter era Marching -
Those were the days topps.....none of these fairys playing the game then needing the hurdle anyone....went straight through 'em Thats fine then, we finally agree that the penalty was the right decision.
No he didn't dive, you've said that the two incidents of Rooney as you put it 'falling' and Almunia making contact were virtually simultaneous. It makes no bearing on a disciplinary front, the correct decision was awarded. It's tit for tat from Arsenal fans who are trying to grab some form of moral high ground after yesterday.
Exactly. People are taking moments out of context, they're decided he's dived and try to fit what actually happened around that
There's nothing there that shows a dive to me. There's plenty that says he knows he's gunna get clattered and busts a gut to get any contact on the ball first and thus win the penalty
All that video proves is Almunia is a shocking keeper who made a woeful decision. He was nowhere near to getting that ball. Stonewall penalty.
Bingo, a 50/50 chance & Rooney knows if he gets the ball before Almunia then he's got a good shout as Almunia had committed himself by running from his line.
The question is whether he gets his foot stuck or deliberately drags it.
Brad said:
What do you mean? There's loads of ways of diving, from the Gerrard multi-limb starfish to the Inzaghi wet fish to the Eboue total internal organ failure.
Brad said:
We were having a decent discussion but now we're back to rhetoric. Yes, you're right, the ref gave a penalty, therefore it's a penalty. What we're talking about is whether it should have been a penalty.
Brad said:
Playing for a penalty isn't as bad as a straight dive, in my book it's still to be deprecated, an honest player can certainly draw the challenge to create an opening but he should try to evade or ride it.
I havent read the whole thread but the contentiousness of the pen bemuses me. It was stick on and if it hadnt been awarded in this particular game noone would even be mentioning it.
Exactly!
Forwards are taught to trail a leg in those situations. What good would jumping over the rushing goalkeeping do with the ball that far wide going out of play.
Rooney WON a penalty everyone knows that. He did it fairly within the rules on the game. Any Gooners whining about it should be annoyed with Almunia for committing himself when there was no need.
You can't possibly answer that first one from video evidence Plech, only Rooney knows that. But given it happens as he's still going for the ball, really as a consequence of him going for the ball, surely you have to give him the benefit?
As for the latter, what's he meant to do? Not go for the ball as hard as he could, because he might draw the foul from Almunia and that would be unsporting? Come on now Plech. Rooney has every right to just try and get something on the ball and capitalise on Almunia's stupidity. That's a world away from diving to win a penalty when no contacts been made
Good lord, they've not got the sense nor conviction to talk common sense & blame the man who caused it all. It's easier to try & palm it off as someone else's fault. It was Boruc's in the week & now Rooney's.
I think Plech is making the point that instead of standing his ground and getting hit by Almunia (which he would have anyway, IMO), he leaned/fell into the contact to make sure.
As you rightly say, the former is fine, the latter slightly greyer an area.
His fall/slip/whatever it was seems to me to have just about pre-empted the contact. But in truth, once Almunia hit him the ref didn't have to worry about what Rooney's intentions were.
Well then Plech is wrong because he clearly didn't do that
And Almunia went right through him anyway
I hope that's not what Plech is claiming because its just nonsense
Why are we arguing this? Clear penalty that would be given 10/10
No you're wrong
....cos you're doing exactly what you're accusing us of - you've decided he did'nt dive and have called his trailing foot, the left one, the one which is dropping as soon as he sees Almunia will inevitably clatter him, a foot that gets caught in sticky mud ! - its not - its simply where his foot, toe first btw, went into a very wet and moveable turf and then trailed on through as he then dropped the rest if his body downwards - all just before he gets hit - he was halfway through the process of a dive when Amunia made it all irrelevant anyway in respect of the decision
Btw if his foot got stuck in the mud how come it did'nt make him twist round and make him hold his ground like it should ?
Answer - cos it didnt get stuck it simply went into the very wet and soft turf toe first and he carried on
There's no doubt it was a penalty just as there's no doubt it was a dive
Right, even I'm bored with this now. You cnuts now seem to agree that he started falling before Almunia hit him, so the only question is whether he started falling deliberately or not.
Given that everyone seems to agree that he was 'playing for a penalty', it's not exactly an amazing leap to suggest that when he went down whilst playing for a penalty, he went down deliberately.
Given that everyone seems to agree that he was 'playing for a penalty', it's not exactly an amazing leap to suggest that when he went down whilst playing for a penalty, he went down deliberately.
There's plenty of doubt he dived Jopub. And he didn't drop the rest of his body downwards at all, when his back lack gets caught and drags, his front leg is still going for the ball and he puts full weight on it, until it's cleaned out by Almunia. There's no doubt if Almunia wasn't there, he'd have gone to ground, well not unless he has Ox legs which I guess he does, but why does that have to be a dive? Why couldn't it be say what happened; that he lost full balance attempting to nick the ball away from Almunia before he got clattered
There's no doubt you and you Arsenal supporting goons have spent ten pages talking out of their arses
There's no doubt you and you Arsenal supporting goons have spent ten pages talking out of their arses
Everyone agreed that from the start
It is a pretty big leap. For a start, if he knows he's gunna get clattered, why would he dive prior to that? He can do one, but he can't do both! He's either being clever to get to the ball first and win a penalty, or he's diving in order to cheat the ref into giving a pen. And pretty clearly it's the former
The Arsenal supporters are too busy crying foul to objectively analyse what actually happened, rather than what they want to have happened
If 'getting to the ball first' means falling over, there's no real difference between those two
And he doesn't know he's gonna get clattered. This is happening at top speed, he's not superhuman, all he knows is Almunia's sprinting out, he doesn't know whether Almunia will get ball, man, or nothing, he just knows it's a close one, so as he reaches the ball he starts to drop.
He clearly starts to go down well before the contact
Clearly? Weren't you pointing out in this thread earlier how it bothered you that people were representing speculation as fact?
Yep. Which I agreed with in the bit you didn't quote.
So be it. I reckon that's how it happened, but to be honest I reckon I've said everything I can on this one.
Ah come on Plech, he can see the keepers committing himself, he's busting a gut to get something on that ball. I think you are divorcing reality when you're saying he doesn't realised he's gunna get clattered there
And there is a world of difference between the two. One is cheating. The other one is perfectly fine in a sporting context
That's because in this instance, it is a fact. He didn't lean into Almunia in the slightest. You can see that clear as day
He's going down yes, but there's a perfectly legitimate reason why that may be the case, rather than it being a dive
Only Rooney will know, but it makes no logical sense when he's clearly trying to get to the ball - and his back leg gets stuck and trails before that happens - to knock it away from the keeper before he gets clattered, which clearly he knows or else he wouldn't have bust a gut to knock the ball into no-mans land
I don't think at that speed he has any way of knowing whether Almunia's going to get him, the ball, both or neither. You're a decent player I understand, put yourself in his position. You're sprinting for a through-ball, the keeper's coming out, you stretch for it but as you're doing so you know you're not going to be able to round him and collect it. So as you both reach it you fall over him. We've all done it. If the pen's given, you get up feeling pleased with yourself but slightly guilty, just like you do when you tap a winger's ankles when he's about to get a yard on you. It's the feeling of having executed a bad thing very nicely.
But you yourself admit he's playing for the penalty. You admit he starts falling before Almunia arrives, and you admit he's playing for the penalty, but you don't admit the two are likely to be connected...
The thing that tells you he knows Plech is that he's just tried to get any old touch on the ball Plech. If he was unaware of the keeper coming, he'd have retained control of the ball, and not stretched for it as he clearly did there
I'm a striker, that's precisely what you do in that situation
I'm still struggling to understand how its logical Rooney would dive before he's got to the keeper? What would that achieve? If you stretched for it, then realised you're not gunna get it, if you're a cheat that's when you'd go down. Not before you make contact with the ball!
He came out with his arms stretched to make contact. He was always, definately, going to get Rooney if Rooney got a foot on the ball. He did get a foot on the ball, he knew it was a penalty and if anything, Rooney protected both himself and the keeper by avoiding worse contact. Even if he jumped out of the way of the challenge and the keeper missed the ball, he'd have been preventing a goal scoring oppertunity through foul means, so its a penalty regardless.
I think he's playing for the penalty, yes. He is falling before Almunia gets there, but I think thats as a result of him reacting to get the ball first before being clattered, rather than attempting to dive, which makes no sense in the circumstances. You're either trying to get to the ball first to make sure you get a penalty when the keeper clatters you, or you dive because you want to cheat and the keeper isn't going to clatter you. You can't have it both ways
I didn't say he was unaware of the keeper coming, I said exactly the opposite! He doesn't know whether Almunia's going to take him out or not, but he knows they're getting there at roughly the same time.
He had to stretch for it as he wouldn't have got near it otherwise, but he was unlikely to be able to control it.
It's round about as he makes contact with it that he starts falling, but he starts trailing the leg earlier. If it's a dive, it's a Michael Owen classic - instead of going flying over your leading leg, which can look exaggerated, you drop your trailing one so your whole body slides down just as the opponent arrives. Owen's fooled countless refs with that, he rarely looks like he's diving. Shearer was good at it too.
That said, I've no idea whether that happened or his foot just got stuck. But it's far from inconceivable.
You can, it can be halfway in between, you get something on the ball but make sure you go down too, someone did it to me in five-a-side a few months ago (I was the defender) but underestimated quite how slow I am, I got nowhere near him but he went down as he reached the ball, and looked a right cnut trying to win a penalty in a kickabout.
No he doesn't ................ as I said earlier I have yet to hear one ex-pro or ex-ref say it was anything but a penalty. As few of them are noted for being pro-United perhaps its likely they might be right.
He obviously went down before any contact, knowing he just needed to get a touch on it. The keeper is either going to take him out or get very close, so he went down to give us the best chance of a penalty.
The thing is, if Almunia didn't touch him, Rooney would never have kept it in play anyway. It seems weird to get a penalty for something like that. But at the same time you can't have keepers clattering into strikers as they're running towards the byline. It's tough to draw the line.
The thing is, if Almunia didn't touch him, Rooney would never have kept it in play anyway. It seems weird to get a penalty for something like that. But at the same time you can't have keepers clattering into strikers as they're running towards the byline. It's tough to draw the line.
Look at his trailing leg. There's no way he's going anywhere but down.
RedPhil said:
Who gives a feck what thicko pundits think, Phil?
Brad, stop wasting your time.
No one anywhere, on any station or channel has debated this - it is a non event. It is possibly the most clear penalty you will see this whole season - seriously.
What a waste of ten pages.
So what if Rooney played for the penalty? As said earlier people play for fouls across the whole pitch every single game played in the whole of the world every week. You know when you knock it past a player then run into them and get a free kick? Thats playing for it. It has been the case since football was invented as a sport.
No one anywhere, on any station or channel has debated this - it is a non event. It is possibly the most clear penalty you will see this whole season - seriously.
What a waste of ten pages.
So what if Rooney played for the penalty? As said earlier people play for fouls across the whole pitch every single game played in the whole of the world every week. You know when you knock it past a player then run into them and get a free kick? Thats playing for it. It has been the case since football was invented as a sport.
but does rooney spoon the ball with a heavy touch if he's not about to be fouled? ie: if there is no almunia, and rooney is simply running onto a ball, does his first touch go out?
this is not a matter of rooney demonstrating poor touch that eliminates a scoring chance and then looking for contact for penalty. the moment almunia comes for it, the collision is unavoidable. rooney's job is to get to the ball before the keeper and then avoid injury when the inevitable foul occurs. that's all we're seeing.
stonewall penalty.