Ronaldo penalty claim vs Juventus

secret007 · 02-20-11, 03:24 AM

I would like to add a few more sentences. I dont think it was a 100% penalty because it could also be considered a rough/excessive body check but since it was inside the penalty area, it wasn't 100% penalty ( you know there's a different between a foul inside and outside the penalty area ). Notice that Juventus player (Iuliano) tried to put his feet in front of Ronaldo but pulled the last minute. What can you do as a defender when a player as fast as ROnaldo came right TO you?

by the way im not saying its was not a penalty. I think it was a penalty but if the game was refereed by 100 different people, 30 people would not give the penalty.

Thanks, sorry in advance for my ENglish (it's my 3rd language)

jw · 02-20-11, 03:33 AM

I think he looked for the penalty ... he pushed the ball away and then ran into the defender ... there was never any way he could get around him .... so he simply ran straight into him. The defender stood his ground .. momentum was moving him forward but he did not intentionally block Ronaldo ... personally i'd say it would be given 50% of the time in the English Premiership and 80% in Italy.

secret007 · 02-20-11, 03:35 AM

fair enough, thanks for the comment.. I am waiting for the comments from other people. I need probably around 30 people opinions to make a conclusion

manu4life · 02-20-11, 03:46 AM

penalty

secret007 · 02-20-11, 04:00 AM

Originally posted by manu4life

penalty

I would like you to elaborate more. I DO think it was a penalty but could it go the other way given my explanation?

p3re · 02-20-11, 04:11 AM

That's a penalty that only biased referees would not give.

McDeere · 02-20-11, 11:35 AM

Penalty !!!

barcelonafc · 02-20-11, 06:14 PM

penalty now as you cant touch these sissies!!!

15 years ago never a penalty!!

RedDevil11 · 02-20-11, 06:51 PM

Clear penalty imo....defender made no attempt at playing the ball. Had it happened outside the box, it would almost certainly be called...so no different

Pauulzcappin · 02-20-11, 06:55 PM

The defender clearly goes towards Ronaldo to stop him from advancing. Clear penalty.

secret007 · 02-21-11, 02:26 AM

I found something interesting..

If you guys have time and are interested in this topic, you can read the article here.

http://www.rvsoa.net/tng%20oct%202004.htm

It says:

If the impedance occurs in the penalty area, the punishment is an indirect free kick and NOT a penalty kick. A penalty kick is not awarded for impedance inside the penalty area.

and this is what the referee said a couple of years ago regarding that infamous penalty claim.

“I watched replays the following day, I made a mistake,” Ceccarini admitted to La Gazzetta dello Sport this morning.

“However, I would have awarded an indirect free kick in the penalty box. I don’t want to come off as arrogant, but that was obstruction.

secret007 · 02-21-11, 02:30 AM

Originally posted by p3re

That's a penalty that only biased referees would not give.

Thanks for your opinion ..

Originally posted by McDeere

Penalty !!!

Originally posted by barcelonafc

penalty now as you cant touch these sissies!!! 15 years ago never a penalty!!

Yes, soccer used to be a phyiscal game, nowadays a single touch foul.

Originally posted by RedDevil11

Clear penalty imo....defender made no attempt at playing the ball. Had it happened outside the box, it would almost certainly be called...so no different

Thanks for your opinion

.. Will you change your opinion after you read the article I had above. Was it obstruction ( indirect free kick ) or was it penalty according to you.

Originally posted by Pauulzcappin

The defender clearly goes towards Ronaldo to stop him from advancing. Clear penalty.

Thanks Paul for the opinion!

Dark Horse · 02-21-11, 04:10 AM

Originally posted by secret007

I found something interesting..

If you guys have time and are interested in this topic, you can read the article here.

http://www.rvsoa.net/tng%20oct%202004.htm

It says:

If the impedance occurs in the penalty area, the punishment is an indirect free kick and NOT a penalty kick. A penalty kick is not awarded for impedance inside the penalty area.

Referees never give this anymore. And they are wrong. Last week there was a last minute pk in the game between Fulham and Chelsea (that Fulham missed). It should have been an indirect free kick inside the penalty area.

secret007 · 02-21-11, 06:01 AM

Spot on Darkhorse. It is very rarely for the referee to give an indirect free kick inside the penalty are nowadays. It happens probably 1 in a hundred games or something like that. But is Law 12 still the valid current rule or has it been changed?

But, if we based that case on that rule, it wasn't a penalty, am I correct?

..

It was 14 years ago so that law was valid at that time and hence why the referee said he should have given indirect free kick to Inter

RedDevil11 · 02-21-11, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by secret007

I found something interesting.. If you guys have time and are interested in this topic, you can read the article here. http://www.rvsoa.net/tng%20oct%202004.htm It says: If the impedance occurs in the penalty area, the punishment is an indirect free kick and NOT a penalty kick. A penalty kick is not awarded for impedance inside the penalty area. and this is what the referee said a couple of years ago regarding that infamous penalty claim. “I watched replays the following day, I made a mistake,” Ceccarini admitted to La Gazzetta dello Sport this morning. “However, I would have awarded an indirect free kick in the penalty box. I don’t want to come off as arrogant, but that was obstruction.

Yes, the 'impeding' infraction replaced the old rule of obstruction (Fifa). If there is no contact made when impeding, then it is an indirect free kick, but if contact is made then it's a direct free kick. As per ref, Mark Clattenburg " If there is obstruction in the penalty area then it would be a Indirect Free Kick but if there was contact in the process of a player trying to obstruct another player then it would be a penalty kick"

So yes, it is still a penalty kick in this case.