• Join ccmfans.net

    ccmfans.net is the Central Coast Mariners fan community, and was formed in 2004, so basically the beginning of time for the Mariners. Things have changed a lot over the years, but one thing has remained constant and that is our love of the Mariners. People come and go, some like to post a lot and others just like to read. It's up to you how you participate in the community!

    If you want to get rid of this message, simply click on Join Now or head over to https://www.ccmfans.net/community/register/ to join the community! It only takes a few minutes, and joining will let you post your thoughts and opinions on all things Mariners, Football, and whatever else pops into your mind. If posting is not your thing, you can interact in other ways, including voting on polls, and unlock options only available to community members.

    ccmfans.net is not only for Mariners fans either. Most of us are bonded by our support for the Mariners, but if you are a fan of another club (except the Scum, come on, we need some standards), feel free to join and get into some banter.

ALM Round 17 v the Drive Bys, sans Rudan

Hello Sailor

Well-Known Member
Show the frame where he kicks out Ronnie's leg.
I've seen refs regularly call this a foul tackle even if the tackler got a touch on the ball. It should make no difference if it is in the box or elsewhere on the pitch. I dont think he kicked Barcellos at all, I think Barcellos's leg tripped Cleur.
In any case the ref had a good view, the defenders didn't seem to protest much and VAR wasnt considered necessary. I'll take the points but I would have preferred to beat them without needing a milked pen.Barcellos trip pdf_compressed_page-0001a.jpg
 
Last edited:

pjennings

Well-Known Member
The 2 pics in the original post show 2 different stories.

The first one looks like Ronald is barging into the defender whereas the second one looks like the defender has come through the back of Ronald.

That's why I dislike using still frame.
Especially for VAR. For that there should be viewing from all angles in normal times - but only one viewing. No slow motions and no still frames. If you can't tell from that it is not a clear and obvious penalty.
 

Stuartmcateer

Well-Known Member
Especially for VAR. For that there should be viewing from all angles in normal times - but only one viewing. No slow motions and no still frames. If you can't tell from that it is not a clear and obvious penalty.
I'd be a bit more generous. Three views and 1/2 speed. But not super slow or still.
 

Wombat

Well-Known Member
He's in the running for the Oscars but based on the rules it's a clear Pen.
I'm giving you a thumbs up for the Oscars comment. The fact is he stepped across him and dived in one motion. Absolutely not a foul (so therefore not a penalty) but well milked. He 100% played for the penalty with no intention of getting the ball. Street cunning.
 
Last edited:

pjennings

Well-Known Member
Not saying you’re wrong Quirky but if Faz’s challenge was a red, then so was Clisby’s on Brandtman if we’re being consistent.

I still can’t believe that Wankerers didn’t get a single card awarded, as Clisby and Priestman both deserved them imo.
I don't think Faz's was a red. But he did another challenge that should have got him a second yellow. That said Clisby did two on Brandtman that both should have been yellow.
 

shipwreck

Well-Known Member
I've watched the pen about 10 times now and I'm sorry but I have to disagree with anyone saying it's not a pen, despite all the efforts put in to screenshot certain frames.

If a player gets in front of you in the box you can't play at the ball, because if you make any contact, it's a pen...
 

Tevor

Well-Known Member
drive bys

I've watched the pen about 10 times now and I'm sorry but I have to disagree with anyone saying it's not a pen, despite all the efforts put in to screenshot certain frames.

If a player gets in front of you in the box you can't play at the ball, because if you make any contact, it's a pen...
100%, I’m a little miffed that so many are adamant it’s not a Pen. If it wasn’t the Drive Byes would be carrying on like never before. All they whinge about is Faz not getting a red.
 

Hello Sailor

Well-Known Member
The 2 pics in the original post show 2 different stories.

The first one looks like Ronald is barging into the defender whereas the second one looks like the defender has come through the back of Ronald.

That's why I dislike using still frame.
yeah i get that but single frames were the only way to illustrate my point. Even then I had to play around with the format to enable posting due to their size. A clip would have been preferable but just not possible.
 

Ads

Well-Known Member
He did but there was also contact making it legal

I’m going to half agree with Wombat here.

His dive started before the contact, bent his body and back leg falling before the contact but did it in perfect timing that not obvious enough to get overturned.

Literally milliseconds more and the dive would have stood out more.
 

Corsair

Well-Known Member
I'm giving you a thumbs up for the Oscars comment. The fact is he stepped across him and dived in one motion. Absolutely not a foul (so therefore not a penalty) but well milked. He 100% played for the penalty with no intention of getting the ball. Street cunning.

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
- impedes an opponent with contact
- pushes

On this occasion careless would be the judgement, hence no card (if i remember correctly).

He milked it but there was contact so the pen was awarded within the rules.
 

Online statistics

Members online
33
Guests online
383
Total visitors
416

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
6,810
Messages
398,420
Members
2,769
Latest member
LaurindaLa
Top