Honesty.

[RowlattsFox]

West Ham were clever and got in the refs mind, they were pushing the defenders as much they were getting pushed. I'm confident moss has just seen Reid on the floor and gave it.

You are going to get contact in the box, it's 15 players running into each other in a small area. Attackers know if they fall to the ground they have a chance of getting the decision.

[Dan]

TBF he was consistant, just consistantly bad.

 

Haha he was in that sense but I'm sorry, the Reid one is no more of a penalty than the Vardy one and the Vardy one I've admitted wasn't.

 

Schlupp's was very soft, and for me only given because the absolute stone waller on Huth wasn't given.

 

Then you've got the one from Huth in the build up to our goal - that's a penalty. Then you've got the Ogbonna one on Vardy in the first half where he's got him in a headlock pretty much - that's a penalty.

 

So out of six penalty calls, only one for me was right, which is simply pitiful. Absolutely unacceptable level of incompetence that would only be accepted in football.

[kingfox]

So Gallagher accuses Vardy of diving but not Winston Reid, what a tosser.

Vardy shouldn't of been booked in the first place, Kouyate falls over him.

Vardy did dive in my opinion, he leans in, waits for contact then dives, he does this often but this time the ref didn't fall for it.

Reid knew exactly what he was doing for the penalty, he was frustrated before hand, thought I'm going to try and get myself a penalty here, Wes goes with him, minimal contact, then Reid throws himself to the ground.

If Reid's was a penalty then Huth should of definitely got one in the 90th minute. There was pushing and shoving all game but this was a blatant headlock, it was like I was watching the WWE not a football match.

West Ham had three bookings yesterday and Ogbonna wasn't one of them. This idiot should of been sent off yesterday in all honesty. Two headlocks and he took Okazaki clean out in the first half.

As for our penalty, Jeff went down extremely soft; however why did Carroll step into him like that, there was no need, knowing Jeff he probably would of ran the ball out of play anyway.

Inconsistency throughout and I'm still reeling over it, an absolute fvcking joke of a refereeing performance.

[Merging Cultures]

It's not a non contact sport, that didn't contribute to Vardys swan dive.

 

Sure, it is a contact sport, but Vardy had knocked the ball past him and holding a player is still a foul. Therefore, Vardy was fouled first, he was pulled back/slowed down/had his run impeded. That is a foul all day long, and regardless of what happens after, that initial foul should be penalised.

 

In my opinion, that pull does then have an effect on Vardy's movement, and he is legitimate in coming closer to the defender and getting tangled up. It wasn't a dive, it wasn't simulation. And regardless, Ogbonna fouled him first.

 

Getting repetitive on here.

[RowlattsFox]

Vardy falls because he wants to, not because he is forced too. Sometimes that is still a foul but this time it isn't.

Similar to the one at Norwich, but vardy executed his plan better and managed to get his body in a position to be 'fouled' and he fell more naturally.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

I think I have slipped into some parallel universe where only a few people can see hands and arms, because I definitely saw Ogbonna reach out and grab Vardy once he'd got past him. Which is initiating contact.

I think the whole inconsistency issue is the main one here

The ref was truly awful (both for Leicester and West Ham in fairness), so inconsistent

Should of been a great end to end game between two very good sides was spoilt by the Tottenham (allegedly) supporting ref

[davieG]

Jon Moss divides opinion among former referees in Leicester match

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/18/jonathan-moss-leicester-city-west-ham-former-referees

[jammie82uk]

Haha he was in that sense but I'm sorry, the Reid one is no more of a penalty than the Vardy one and the Vardy one I've admitted wasn't.

 

Schlupp's was very soft, and for me only given because the absolute stone waller on Huth wasn't given.

 

Then you've got the one from Huth in the build up to our goal - that's a penalty. Then you've got the Ogbonna one on Vardy in the first half where he's got him in a headlock pretty much - that's a penalty.

 

So out of six penalty calls, only one for me was right, which is simply pitiful. Absolutely unacceptable level of incompetence that would only be accepted in football.

 

I could be wrong and could be for something else but It appears he seen it and the ref was going to give a free kick to West Ham for this as he waves play on when the keeper has the ball in his hands 

[Wolfox]

My initial reaction was that it was a dive and yellow was the right card... The first yellow wasn't, so, he should have still been on the pitch...

However, even Gary Mabbut said it was a penalty as WH defender had his arms on him... So, if there is any reason to doubt, you wave play on that it...

Such a shocker of a ref...

[NotQuiteAFox]

I said to my mate before the sending off that he needed to be careful as he was on a yellow already.

 

Nonetheless I like everyone else around me assumed it was a nailed on pen. Looking at the replays you can see he's played for it. I'd say 'dived' is the wrong word to use, there's definitely contact, it was just initiated by Vardy when he randomly throws his legs towards Ogbonna.

[RonnieTodger]

It's a massive dive. Anyone that says it's a penalty is kidding themselves. That doesn't excuse Moss' horrific performance because the first yellow was wrong, their penalty was wrong, ours was wrong and the decision to not give Payet a second yellow was wrong.

Having said all that, why did Vardy risk it when he's on a yellow? If that's a penalty, then the game is gone and defenders may as well just give up when the striker gets in front. 

[Carl the Llama]

Regardless of your opinions on the other calls, I can't be the only one who thinks Carroll chest-barging Schlupp to the floor's a stonewaller every day of the week?

[inckley fox]

I don't think there are any blue specs about it. The inconsistencies were the reason for commentators, fans and players alike being bemused and they went both ways.

 

If he booked Vardy for the accumulation of three fouls, then you have to look at the nature of the challenges too - because normally a booking for cumulative offences would be for more than three. At least two of those challenges, including the 'final straw', were entirely innocuous and the other challenge was some way from being a booking on its own. Moss would have to book a lot more players game in game out if he were to give out yellows for those.

 

As for Vardy's second yellow, yes, he is looking for he referee to blow his whistle. He's tried to buy a foul and for me it's a goal kick, possibly a yellow. I have seen these given, and I've seen commentators and fellow referees justify such penalty calls on the basis of prior contact, but I'll give the referee this one. But the rules don't specify simulation in the box, and there were 3-4 further incidents of players trying to buy free kicks and the referee making no decision. So again, consistency is needed. Why is Schlupp's a penalty but Vardy's a yellow for diving? Why are Emeniki, Antonio and Payet not also booked for throwing themselves over and claiming free kicks when there was a lack of contact?

 

So in isolation, you might be able to justify the former yellow for accumulation, or the second yellow for diving, but when you put the two together it's hard to come to any conclusion other than the referee being especially harsh on Vardy. And, in fact, it's simply impossible to say the referee has been consistent. You might say that the inconsistency has favoured Leicester in one case and punished them in the other, but it's still impossible to defend the officiating.

 

Which brings us to the penalties. If Gallagher is right and Huth is fouling the defender before the holding, then surely a free kick needs to be given in the first instance? There's no way anyone can argue that the two 'offences' occur simultaneously. To me, and to pretty much everyone other than Gallagher and Moss, it's every bit as much a penalty as the Morgan incident. And, as Shearer said, why have officials been ignoring these decisions all season (think of Huth having his shirt pulled off his back) but decided, suddenly, in one isolated incident within a game, to give it? There has to be consistency between games as well as within a game. Here there was neither.

 

So I'm not arguing that the referee was biased, in fact in the end he - in a roundabout sort of way - gifted us a point. But he also made it far harder for us to win the game in the first place.

 

There are a few major headaches coming up here for the authorities. This was one of the most widely viewed games, worldwide, of the PL season and the international coverage made ample reference to the poor standard of English refereeing, which is hardly helpful to the brand. So do they acknowledge that there were some shocking refereeing decisions in this game, as there were, one way or the other, and take Moss off the list? If they do then, if he's set to referee an upcoming Spurs game, they'll stand accused of - for a second time - ensuring that Spurs have a more appropriate referee than they've managed to for Leicester. If they don't, and a decision goes in Spurs' favour, Moss will be held up as having played a major, major role in the title battle. The same accusation will apply. If he reports Vardy and there's an extra match ban (and there was recorded bad language from West Ham players too at the end, and Carroll's post-match comments, and there will have been plenty of unreported bad language against Moss in his previous matches this season) the ramifications will be even more severe.

 

If anyone has the slightest capacity for foresight in the footballing authorities, there will be a gentle nudge for Moss to leave things as they are regarding Vardy's language. If Moss gives a major decision to Spurs in an upcoming game, there will be major questions asked. If their referee tonight gives a major decision to Spurs, there will be major questions asked. If Moss is removed from an Spurs game while Vardy is sitting on a two match ban as a consequence of his handling of a Leicester game, there will be major questions asked.

[Guest ttfn]

The picture on the Guardian website for the match report is a goalkeeper angrily booting the ball into the stands after conceding a last minute penalty.

You couldn't make it up.

[inckley fox]

Jon Moss divides opinion among former referees in Leicester match

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/18/jonathan-moss-leicester-city-west-ham-former-referees

 

 

Poll and Webb say they 'broadly agree' with his decisions but then - especially in Webb's case - they proceed to disagree with nearly all of them.

 

Webb is a peculiar one, though. He was given a major commentary role this season with one network but seems to be finding his role reduced because of his habit of agreeing with practically anything a referee does. They're a notorious bunch for this and the failure to face up to their own shortcomings is a major reason for the collapsing standard of officiating.

[Dan]

I could be wrong and could be for something else but It appears he seen it and the ref was going to give a free kick to West Ham for this as he waves play on when the keeper has the ball in his hands 

 

I'd have to watch that again.

 

Even so it's 4-2 in favour of incorrect.

 

There's apparently an article in the guardian about referees giving their verdicts and they're all disagreeing on things. Are people not concerned about that? The entire thing is becoming pot luck.

 

It's so easy for a referee to bend a game in favour of one team, or make himself the subject of the game, there is simply nothing stopping them. That's unacceptable in my eyes. Something needs to change.

[Spudulike]

Regardless of your opinions on the other calls, I can't be the only one who thinks Carroll chest-barging Schlupp to the floor's a stonewaller every day of the week?

 

Do 'ya know, I've been thinking the same thing. Just seems to be accepted by all that it wasn't a penalty. That would've been a foul anywhere else on the pitch (as alluded to by Henry).

[Spudulike]

It's a massive dive. Anyone that says it's a penalty is kidding themselves. That doesn't excuse Moss' horrific performance because the first yellow was wrong, their penalty was wrong, ours was wrong and the decision to not give Payet a second yellow was wrong.

Having said all that, why did Vardy risk it when he's on a yellow? If that's a penalty, then the game is gone and defenders may as well just give up when the striker gets in front. 

 

Do you believe that its within the laws to hold an opponents arm in a way to restrict their movement ??

[sly1]

Dive he chucked him self in the air c,mon, I would give a 7 for the dive

[SpinneyHillRanger]

West ham should have had ogbonna and payet sent off. Maybe even Reid

For us, Huth could have been sent off for some of his roughhousing

Vardy should never have been sent off. Researched some parts of the game and vardy should have been given a penalty in the first 10 minutes with ogbonna headlocking him. After that he was fouled by Reid, ogbonna - no free kick given. This led to his latish challenge on West ham player and his first yellow.

So we should have had penalty in the first 10 minutes, West ham should have had a penalty just before we scored our goal.

Vardy was fouled in the area and it's a foul all day long outside the area regardless of vardys extra on the dive, it a foul....because its in the box its a penalty.

Then West ham penalty if given, then huth again was a stonewaller at 90 minutes.

Schlupp one was never a penalty. Very soft to say the least.

Overall I think huth and vardy reputations are working against them in decisions. Along with media hype o how Leicester are lucky with handball peblnalty decisions.

[Spudulike]

West ham should have had ogbonna and payet sent off. Maybe even Reid

For us, Huth could have been sent off for some of his roughhousing

Vardy should never have been sent off. Researched some parts of the game and vardy should have been given a penalty in the first 10 minutes with ogbonna headlocking him. After that he was fouled by Reid, ogbonna - no free kick given. This led to his latish challenge on West ham player and his first yellow.

So we should have had penalty in the first 10 minutes, West ham should have had a penalty just before we scored our goal.

Vardy was fouled in the area and it's a foul all day long outside the area regardless of vardys extra on the dive, it a foul....because its in the box its a penalty.

Then West ham penalty if given, then huth again was a stonewaller at 90 minutes.

Schlupp one was never a penalty. Very soft to say the least.

Overall I think huth and vardy reputations are working against them in decisions. Along with media hype o how Leicester are lucky with handball peblnalty decisions.

 

Hurrah!! Someone get it

[ImBlue]

Reid diving was just as clear, minimal/normal contact leading to going down ththe wrong way, theatrically.

Payet should have been in for diving too, both we're on yellows at th time, for more justifiable first yellow cards might I add..

Vardy dived, we all know it deep down, but the inconsistency and lack of mercy was horrible to see from Moss.

Halsey summed it perfectly in the Sun, he went looking for the trouble and could have just not given the penalty, nobody would have said anything. Once he sent Vardy off for diving he had to be on his toes after to be consistent and unfortunately didn't punish Payet or Reid in the same way, he ignored one, and rewarded the other.

The penalties were just daft,

Reid - no pen, got it.

Huth - pen, didn't get it.

Schlupp - no pen, got it.

Idiot.

[Webbo]

Right. I've decided that's it for me. I did my bitching and moaning yesterday. The ref was a total twat but it's over now, the game finished 2-2 and that's the end of it. Time to move on.

[Durnerz]

Vardy did what he's done all season, initiated the contact and gone down...I can understand if there's no contact and the referee is in a position to see it clearly but neither of those instances happened. So for me its a clear shout for play on and get up.

The thing that really pissed me off was the inconsistency in giving the penalty for Reid, who deserved a yellow for that ridiculous dive. Then Huth gets held down by Ogbonna and nothing is given.

Great spirit to come back and maybe Jon Moss will come back to the Prem after officiating in League 2 for a while.



 

[ImBlue]

Right. I've decided that's it for me. I did my bitching and moaning yesterday. The ref was a total twat but it's over now, the game finished 2-2 and that's the end of it. Time to move on.

Considering the perceived injustices and bad luck, we've come out with a very credible result and even more belief