By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Having given it, if he had reviewed he would have stuck with the decision - Walker was silly to put his arm across how he did and it ended up in the opponent's face.
Had the ref not awarded it and VAR been checked he would not have changed his mind either. The contact was minimal and the player went down very easily.
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 22:09 - Jun 19 by Currie10
Absolutely stone wall he's looking the wrong bloody way for a start.
I understand people who are of the opinion that it might've been a pen, but appreciate it's not clear-cut (sensible people like Christiand), but to call it "stone wall" is just silly. Even Tunisians wouldn't call it stone wall.
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 21:23 - Jun 19 by Nthsuffolkblue
It was one of those 50-50 calls in my opinion.
Having given it, if he had reviewed he would have stuck with the decision - Walker was silly to put his arm across how he did and it ended up in the opponent's face.
Had the ref not awarded it and VAR been checked he would not have changed his mind either. The contact was minimal and the player went down very easily.
Nah - 48.7/51.3 in my opinion 🙄
1
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 09:55 - Jun 20 with 4090 views
Walker could feel the guy was behind him, he put his arm up to guard the area around him and then throws his arm back slightly and catches the guy in the face as it looked like the player was moving passed to attack the ball. The ref was looking right at them...it looks like Walker's arm movement has stopped the player from getting to the ball. Soft but against teams like Tunisia, they'll take every opportunity they can.
Still hacked off about the inconsistency regarding the Kane and McGuire penalty claims.
I will never be able to even remotely accept an opinion that says that was a pen. if that cheating pr1ck hadn't fell to the floor like he'd been shot it wouldn't have been given/considered
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 10:19 - Jun 20 by textbackup
I will never be able to even remotely accept an opinion that says that was a pen. if that cheating pr1ck hadn't fell to the floor like he'd been shot it wouldn't have been given/considered
And people try to make excuses as to why ref right to give it - he wasn't. It wasn't a foul.
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 10:21 - Jun 20 by itfcjoe
And people try to make excuses as to why ref right to give it - he wasn't. It wasn't a foul.
the Tunisia player walked into the back of KW, and fell backwards, that's the most unnatural reaction there could have been to that. if anything KW should have fell forwards and we get a freekick (which would have been harsh on the attacker - fully grown men falling over at the smallest of touches, I fcking kills me to see)
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 10:41 - Jun 20 by textbackup
clear fcking cut?! what the fck is wrong with you
Exhausted this with Brixton Blue yesterday, but when you raise your arms like Walker did, he's asking for the referee to make a decision. I just don't understand why Walker just didn't contest the header? It would have to be a terrific header to beat Pickford from that distance.
Literal interpretation of the law, yes it's a pen. However, common sense should prevail to prevent 10 penalties per game in similar circumstances. The contact is accidental and caused as much by the attacker as the defender. The attacker isn't getting to the ball anyway and it's not an obvious goal scoring opportunity.
Lazy defending, but that doesn't justify it being a penalty.
Also, without wanting to be a raving conspiracy theorist, VAR appears to be biased towards the underdog if the Tunisia-England and Germany-Mexico games are anything to go by. When you also consider the draw Russia have had...
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 10:47 - Jun 20 by christiand
Exhausted this with Brixton Blue yesterday, but when you raise your arms like Walker did, he's asking for the referee to make a decision. I just don't understand why Walker just didn't contest the header? It would have to be a terrific header to beat Pickford from that distance.
Because the ball was nowhere near him and he got a shout to leave it.
It wasn't good defending though.
No way in a million years the Tunisian player was getting on the end of that cross which was why he took a gamble at trying to con the ref instead - it worked.
0
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 10:59 - Jun 20 with 3942 views
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 10:51 - Jun 20 by m14_blue
Because the ball was nowhere near him and he got a shout to leave it.
It wasn't good defending though.
No way in a million years the Tunisian player was getting on the end of that cross which was why he took a gamble at trying to con the ref instead - it worked.
That's what made it look even worse. Poor positioning from Walker. If he was facing the ball he would have been able to manage that situation so much better. The fact he wasn't looking at the ball and raises his arm towards the striker makes up the referee's mind.
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 10:17 - Jun 20 by Currie10
The fact he's looking the wrong bloody way on a cross is terrifying enough when we play better opposition.
Jesus wept.
Yes, it is a clear cut pen. No other option. Very thick from Walker.
No other option?! Give over.
The bloke has no intent or chance on getting the ball, Walker just positions his body in the way to make srure.
All this talk of allowing the ref to make a decision etc is just total and utter bollox. It's not a foul, if a player is shielding a ball out for a goal kick and you run into the back of them is it a foul? Of course not.
He doesn't impede his attempt to get the ball - if you think that is a clear cut penalty I'm not sure football is the sport for you.
He's run into the back of someone, dived, play acted and feigned injury and the ref has made a decision when none was required - he was a terrible ref and wouldn't surprise me if that is the end of his tournament coupled with the decisions not to award Kane at least one penalty when looking straight at it.
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 15:01 - Jun 20 by itfcjoe
No other option?! Give over.
The bloke has no intent or chance on getting the ball, Walker just positions his body in the way to make srure.
All this talk of allowing the ref to make a decision etc is just total and utter bollox. It's not a foul, if a player is shielding a ball out for a goal kick and you run into the back of them is it a foul? Of course not.
He doesn't impede his attempt to get the ball - if you think that is a clear cut penalty I'm not sure football is the sport for you.
He's run into the back of someone, dived, play acted and feigned injury and the ref has made a decision when none was required - he was a terrible ref and wouldn't surprise me if that is the end of his tournament coupled with the decisions not to award Kane at least one penalty when looking straight at it.
Yeah agreed. Never a pen for me. I was chatting to Leon McKenzie today in the gym as I'd figured I'd get a ex-pro's take on it and he laughed it off as a nonsense decision too. Ball came over, walkers position isn't great but he feels the man to hold him off or roll him to shield the ball to allow it to drift pass. Holding your arm up or yiur elbow at shoukder height is what anyone any where in the pitch does to hold off an opponent, it makes you stronger and more of a big physical presence to manouvere.
Can't believe the split in here though. Thought it would be far more clear cut than this.
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 22:26 - Jun 20 by Keaneish
Yeah agreed. Never a pen for me. I was chatting to Leon McKenzie today in the gym as I'd figured I'd get a ex-pro's take on it and he laughed it off as a nonsense decision too. Ball came over, walkers position isn't great but he feels the man to hold him off or roll him to shield the ball to allow it to drift pass. Holding your arm up or yiur elbow at shoukder height is what anyone any where in the pitch does to hold off an opponent, it makes you stronger and more of a big physical presence to manouvere.
Can't believe the split in here though. Thought it would be far more clear cut than this.
That shows you that it's not as clear cut as some previously thought. I appreciate neither are English, but both Andy Gray and Karl Heinz Reidle on Bien Sport thought it was a penalty. It has certainly encouraged plenty of debate and a range of reactions.
Was the referee right to give a penalty against Kyle Walker? on 06:29 - Jun 21 by christiand
That shows you that it's not as clear cut as some previously thought. I appreciate neither are English, but both Andy Gray and Karl Heinz Reidle on Bien Sport thought it was a penalty. It has certainly encouraged plenty of debate and a range of reactions.
[Post edited 21 Jun 2018 6:33]
Interesting they're both strikers whereas Lineker and Shearer thought it was soft. I'd ignore anything Andy Gray says in truth, that man lost credibility a long, long time ago.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
