Holland vs Mexico

[ScouseFox]

Why are itv now showing old clips of Robben clearly being fouled? Wtf is this bullshit channel

[Beliall]

To quote football manager, " the penalty was given and that's that."

[Guest Col city fan]

To quote football manager, " the penalty was given and that's that."

This..

Move on

[DennisNedry]

It probably was a penalty.

 

We've seen softer this WC, and we'll probably see softer given before the end.

 

Besides, Robben had a blatant double-penalty turned down in the 1st half.

 

Cannavaro is a shit pundit, he barely even speaks English.

[theessexfox]

Didn't see it at the time but now I've seen that, never a penalty for me. 

[StanSP]

As if there's people who think there was no contact made for the penalty he eventually got

[Larry_LCFC]

There was slight contact on his foot, but he went down like a train just steamrolled him from behind.

[StanSP]

Regardless, there was contact!

[Manwell Pablo]

So undeserved. Robben really is a shit. His face when he threw himself in the air, embarrassing for someone who probably calls himself a man (regardless of whether there was a bit of contact).

 

If Holland's odds were slashed because they beat Spain 5-1 they should be lengthened after that ordinary performance.

 

oh dear.

[Super_horns]

Bit reckless of the Mexican to stick a foot out given Robben's reputation...you knew he'd go down.

[Manwell Pablo]

Bit reckless of the Mexican to stick a foot out given Robben's reputation...you knew he'd go down.

 

To be fair to him, I don't like diving, but there is contact and he does impede him, I would say there was no need to make it look like he was starring in Swan Lake but he'd got nothing all game off that ref despite being clattered on numerous occasions so maybe it was what was needed.

[Nalis]

I dont get the fallout over the penalty at all.

There was obvious contact so its a stonewall peno, the fact that Robben makes the most of it is irrelevant.

[Guest ttfn]

Exactly the sort of example where the referee should be able to award a penalty and a yellow card for diving.

Absolutely ludicrous reaction from Robben to a stupid foul by Marquez.

[StanSP]

Exactly the sort of example where the referee should be able to award a penalty and a yellow card for diving.

Absolutely ludicrous reaction from Robben to a stupid foul by Marquez.

 

That would confuse so many people .

 

Plus, a dive is when there is no contact made and you're actually trying to con the referee (an example would be where Robben jumped over a tackle by Marquez and feigned injury despite NO contact at all).

 

In the penalty incident, there was contact made and like Mark WNI said above, the reaction of Robben in this case is irrelevant.

[Guest ttfn]

That would confuse so many people .

Plus, a dive is when there is no contact made and you're actually trying to con the referee (an example would be where Robben jumped over a tackle by Marquez and feigned injury despite NO contact at all).

In the penalty incident, there was contact made and like Mark WNI said above, the reaction of Robben in this case is irrelevant.

"Contact" does not automatically mean it's a foul. Just as no contact does not mean it's automatically no foul. Your definition of what constitutes a "dive" is too binary in my book.

It doesn't need to be confusing. Robben going down like he's been shot is ungentlemanly conduct and should be treated as such. Referee should be (and maybe is?) able to award a penalty and take Robben to one side and book him for trying to make it seem worse than it was.

It's even more relevant for fouls in the middle of the pitch where the player is clipped and then spends 30 seconds rolling around.

[Manwell Pablo]

"Contact" does not automatically mean it's a foul. Just as no contact does not mean it's automatically no foul. Your definition of what constitutes a "dive" is too binary in my book.

It doesn't need to be confusing. Robben going down like he's been shot is ungentlemanly conduct and should be treated as such. Referee should be (and maybe is?) able to award a penalty and take Robben to one side and book him for trying to make it seem worse than it was.

It's even more relevant for fouls in the middle of the pitch where the player is clipped and then spends 30 seconds rolling around.

 

It's been a bad tournament for play acting in general I think, shame as otherwise it's been a superb advert for the game.

 

And for all that absloute nonsense the Kitchboxer has been talking recently he did have a point about there being no additional minutes being added after a player has hit the deck in injury time (although he had a mare with the Algerian sub situation )

[Gary Eatfood]

I dont get the fallout over the penalty at all.

There was obvious contact so its a stonewall peno, the fact that Robben makes the most of it is irrelevant.

 

I need to borrow your glasses then because there was no "obvious" contact at all!

[Stadt]

Penalty, book Robben for simulation because he feigned a serious foul?

[Haydos]

I need to borrow your glasses then because there was no "obvious" contact at all!

 

There was. There just was.

 

 

 

And also a gif that shows his right foot clipping Marquez' leg. 

 

You're just wrong, it's all right here, contact on both feet.

[theessexfox]

Minimal contact, not constituting a foul for me. 

[Gary Eatfood]

There was. There just was.

 

 

 

And also a gif that shows his right foot clipping Marquez' leg. 

 

You're just wrong, it's all right here, contact on both feet.

 

I was saying no "obvious" contact and showing the slowest gif in the world doesn't make it any better. The still frame isn't any better because it takes it out of the context of the incident, if anything Robben ensures contact is made.

 

It was shit defending but as brilliant as Robben is he's a cheat.

 

You were adamant that Mexico's first half shout wasn't a pen but this soft nothing tackle and subsequent dive is? Didn't you have money on Holland to win?

[Haydos]

I was saying no "obvious" contact and showing the slowest gif in the world doesn't make it any better. The still frame isn't any better because it takes it out of the context of the incident, if anything Robben ensures contact is made.

It was shit defending but as brilliant as Robben is he's a cheat.

You were adamant that Mexico's first half shout wasn't a pen but this soft nothing tackle and subsequent dive is? Didn't you have money on Holland to win?

What was Mexico's first half shout, I genuinely can't remember? I did have money on them to win, yeah, but I'm not sure what that would have to do with anything, I don't genuinely support them or anything.

You're changing your point now though. I'm not saying he is or isn't a cheat or who instigated the contact. I'm saying there was contact. And a picture of two things touching each other doesn't really need context when the argument is that they did or didn't touch.

[...............]

The rules say (I think) you can't be booked for diving if there's contact, no matter how little. Besides, if the defender decides to put his foot in like that in the last minute, the outcome is inevitable.

[purpleronnie]

I was saying no "obvious" contact and showing the slowest gif in the world doesn't make it any better. The still frame isn't any better because it takes it out of the context of the incident, if anything Robben ensures contact is made.

It was shit defending but as brilliant as Robben is he's a cheat.

You were adamant that Mexico's first half shout wasn't a pen but this soft nothing tackle and subsequent dive is? Didn't you have money on Holland to win?

what always amazes me is the scream players let out as they are diving, is this learnt on the training ground?

[Beliall]

its called "over acting" seehim look for the ref as he goes down