At full throttle it looks like an accidental collision after the ball had been kicked away. Only in slo-mo can you see Rooney going down.
Well, the penalty...?
- Thread starter kanchelskis14
- Start date
Lee Dixon said it was a penalty.
Olesmyhero said it was a penalty. Take from that what you will.
Doesn't look like he is making contact to me and Rooney is already on his way down, that was my point Jason but as usual instead of trying to actually discuss the topic you seem more intent on trying to wind me up.
You said Rooney isn't a diver, that statement is false and he has even been booked for diving in the past. He is just as guilty as others who have dived to win a penalty. Eduardo's dive on Wednesday was much more blatant but both players are guilty of the same thing here.
I thought I was clutching at straws....
Eboue is a cheat and a disgrace, his antics don't surprise me one bit. This topic is not about him so why exactly are you bringing this up here? Lets try to keep things on topic Brad instead of trying to change the subject. Why exactly am I trying to pass of guilt, what exactly am I feeling guilty of? This topic is about the penalty which I feel shouldn't of been given, hell even some Man utd fans on here aren't so sure it was a penalty.
I'm sure you did watch the match in a pub full of Arsenal fans, all of whom who were talking nonsense at the same time. Funny how people on the internet seem to come across those types and then post on the internet to let everyone know.
He was falling down. He hadn't fallen down.
Then Lee Dixon's a twat. Who was he on with one of the scousers? He always kowtows to them.
This is bullshit from Storey and Jopub.
1) It's a penno all day long
2) It's in no way comparable to Eduardo.
1) It's a penno all day long
2) It's in no way comparable to Eduardo.
It's worse than Eduardo who dived after contact. Rooney dives BEFORE contact.
'Accidental collision' - so you're saying Almunia wasn't going for the ball? Just happened to get Rooney instead of the ball?
There was no contact with Eduardo dive, Boruc didn't touch him.
Obviously Rooney dived - he was going down before anything else - how does Almunia touching him after that suddenly make it that he's not going down untouched and not seeking to dive- that's laughable.
Course he fking dived - he's also known to do it and has done it before
In that respect its the same as Eduardo for me no different at all.
Nomatter what happened his intention was to dive and cheat his way to a penalty and by going down before the contact he's illustrating that as clear as it can be illustrated - thats a 'no brainer' for you
Fact is if our keeper had half a fking brain he would'nt have gone ploughing into him anyway
.........but as we know Almunia is shit
For the record at full speed, for the ref, he really had little choice but to give it
This sums a typical Arsenal supporter up entirely for me
For a start he's morally outraged at something that HIS team have been doing and been caught out on. Eduardo, and then the shocking one from Eboue today
Then, he presumes to know exactly what's happened, when it's clear he doesn't. Rooney dived? All we know is Rooney was going down. The MotD replay shows he got his back foot caught in the turf. There's no way of knowing whether he was diving - it's an impressive one if it is - or he's just lost his balance and footing. But of course it's United. At OT. So we're cheats and he's definitely dived
And of course ultimately, everyone knows it's a cast iron penalty, so the whole thing is a complete non-issue anyway
As I said before. I don't see you all bleating about Eboue in the thread about his absolutely blatant attempt to get a man sent off with a pure dive
Eduardo dived before the contact, and the contact had no effect on him whatsoever. Eduardo also kicked his leg towards Boruc. Pires-esque.
There was no contact between Boruc and Eduardo.
Minimal but contact. NO contact before Rooney went to ground.
I think Rooney spooned his touch and went to ground, problem for Arsenal was that Almunia for reasons known only to himself came charging out and clattered him without touching the ball, which was a lot more obvious and easier to decide on than whether Rooney started going to ground before he was touched.
That doesn't mean 'the dive didn't matter as it was a foul anyway'. Simulation's also an offence, in this case it took place before Almunia's foul, so as far as I understand it you give a free-kick to Arsenal and a yellow to Wayne, but Almunia keeps his yellow.
That doesn't mean 'the dive didn't matter as it was a foul anyway'. Simulation's also an offence, in this case it took place before Almunia's foul, so as far as I understand it you give a free-kick to Arsenal and a yellow to Wayne, but Almunia keeps his yellow.
I'm saying two players who were nowhere near the ball were going to run into each other - no foul. It's irrelevant anyway since Rooney threw himself over before that.
There was absolutely no contact, no defender around Eduardo & Boruc didn't touch him.
Between 43-46 secs on this video is the window were you're saying there was contact & its clear Eduardo's feet or legs have zero contact with Boruc
YouTube - Eduardo's Dive (HQ)
fecking bullshit mate! rooneys is debatable at best from an arse point of view, yours midweek isnt. difference being is that boruc made no attempt to win the ball almunia did *, that would be a foul anywhere else on the pitch.
*by that i mean boruc knew he wasnt gonna win and made sure he didnt foul
Rooney was going for the ball & got there before Almunia, it wasn't a goal scoring chance but it was a foul. Hence why the correct decision of a penalty & a yellow card issued (wasn't a red as Rooney wasn't in a clear goal scoring chance)
If it wasn't a penalty then Almunia didn't make any contact - which everyone knows didn't happen. Hence why the right decision was awarded.
Thank you for the clip. No contact.
That's a pretty important point that
Hey, the general consensus from RAWK says it was a penalty, so I will take their word on this one.
You're class mate. There was not contact between Eduardo and Buruc none whatsoever. Rooney on the other hand has been as sly as Lineker was against Cameroon in 1990. He has seen the challenge arriving and made sure of two things:
(a) that Almunia touches him which he clearly does.
(b) that when he does touch him he goes to ground and does not stumble.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this as explained on SS during full time analysis after the game, a player is under no obligation to stay on his feet if contact is made in these situations. Almunia has been stupid and placed himself in a position where contact was definately going to be made, rooney has then been oportunistic and made sure that the contact happened and also that when it did the ref had no choice but the blow.
Yes there is a fine line but this is vastly different from "simulating" contact which is what Eduardo did and therefore deserves everything he gets.
And I might also add that I think Rooney took full advantage of Almunia's positioning, his knees were already bending before contact.
Clear pen IMO
Oh...... where am I morally outraged ??
I never was
As you would have seen there's been no bigger critic of Eduardo than me.
Whats typical of you ( and most on here) is that when one of yours does practically the same thing you have to claim its fking different ! - course its not - any fking idiot can see that
So he just going down cos he would have done that anyways !?! - There's every way of knowing hes diving - use your fking eyes man - christ!
No - there's more than one way of going down and its as clear as fking day that he was diving down with some 'theatricallity' to get the pen before Almunia touched him. Any bell-end could see that too. He's also a known diver in these situations as well
Its only cast iron once Almunia has cluttered into him and I for one dont blame the ref at real speed for giving it
You dont see me mentioning Eboue as this is about my 2nd post in this thread and even though this is about Rooney I'm happy to say Eboue is a fking disgrace and should never ever ever - ever be wearing one of our shirts. I've said it for years - he's a fking embarrassment to us and should be driven out of football for things such as what he did today - its not the first time its probably the 10th - he's a cvnt - and I detest him and his ilk
Sorry I got confused. Are you talking about Eboue or Wenger here?
So if that was so obviously diving, how would someone go down if they, say, got their studs caught in the turf running at full speed and lost their balance as a result? What would that look like? Nothing like this blatant dive obviously
I see Pete and Jopub and Plech saying it shouldn't have been a penalty, so I've watched it again several times. It looks a penalty to me every time. Classic 'player nicks the ball away before being caught' scenario.
Sorry I got confused. Are you talking about Eboue or Wenger here?
So if that was so obviously diving, how would someone go down if they, say, got their studs caught in the turf running at full speed and lost their balance as a result? What would that look like? Nothing like this blatant dive obviously
About what I expected from you really
You had no answer to it did you, because to do so shows you're arguing bollocks
im in two minds almunia did make contact with rooney but as the commentator said the ball did end up in the stretty stand??
regardless i could have smashed something if their goal stood in the 95th minute !!
regardless i could have smashed something if their goal stood in the 95th minute !!
Thats why it was penalty & a bookable offence instead of a straight red card.
What are talking about - no answer to what ?
What in fksnames is there to answer
You're making no point at all other than making yourself look a complete cock if you're trying to cover Rooneys antics with 'studs stuck in the fking mud' and 'losing his balance' -
I've heard it all now
Don't do it Bradley - don't pursue that line
That 2nd part is irrelevant, it makes no difference to whether it was a foul or not. A foul doesn't depend on whether a player is able to get the ball after not, the relevant part of the law is simply...
No doubt Almunia recklessly tripped Rooney.
Where the bit about the ball would matter is in denying a goalscoring opportunity, which is a straight red card offence, and it's clear that Almunia didn't deny him a goalscoring opportunity.
The ref got it 100% right, a penalty and a booking for Almunia
What are talking about - no answer to what ?
What in fksnames is there to answer
You're making no point at all other than making yourself look a complete cock if you're trying to cover Rooneys antics with 'studs stuck in the fking mud' and 'losing his balance' -
I've heard it all now
Don't do it Bradley - don't pursue that line
If you're denying he got his studs stuck in the turf, it's you who's looking the pillock, because the close up on MotD showed it absolutely clearly
I think he's fallen rather than dived there. Not that it makes any odds in the penalty decision obviously
Go sort your own house out before moaning about ours though eh mate?
Rooney was on the way down, but then got cleaned out. Contact was made, therefore it's a penalty.
From fifa.com laws of the game:
"A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by
a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play."
Where "the above ten offences" include:
* trips or attempts to trip an opponent
* tackles an opponent
So according to the rules, whether or not Rooney would have been able to score is irrelevant as far as the penalty kick is concerned (though Almunia only received a yellow instead of a red because Rooney wouldn't have been able to score). Rooney did start his fall a bit early, but Almunia did trip him. Can't see there being any doubt, to be honest.
The rule is silly, though. They should award a penalty if you trip someone in a clear goal scoring opportunity, regardless of them being outside or inside the penalty box, and red cards should only be given out for dangerous tackles. An offense such as the Rooney incident should have been a direct free kick from where he was felled, not a penalty. But the rules being the way they are, it was undoubtedly a penalty.
"A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by
a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play."
Where "the above ten offences" include:
* trips or attempts to trip an opponent
* tackles an opponent
So according to the rules, whether or not Rooney would have been able to score is irrelevant as far as the penalty kick is concerned (though Almunia only received a yellow instead of a red because Rooney wouldn't have been able to score). Rooney did start his fall a bit early, but Almunia did trip him. Can't see there being any doubt, to be honest.
The rule is silly, though. They should award a penalty if you trip someone in a clear goal scoring opportunity, regardless of them being outside or inside the penalty box, and red cards should only be given out for dangerous tackles. An offense such as the Rooney incident should have been a direct free kick from where he was felled, not a penalty. But the rules being the way they are, it was undoubtedly a penalty.