Happy with Bird's dive?

Agreed, it's blatantly obvious that it was a fair penalty, otherwise they'd have gone ballistic.

 

As good an image as we'll get.

I'm going to sit on the fence with this one.

Its difficult to say from the angle given however their players lack of protest speaks volumes for me.

 

It's not really what you asked though. You are conflating two issues. If you are asking a generic question about our players cheating to gain a penalty, why mention Bird?
Why say 'happy with Bird's dive?' You've already decided he dived like it was a fact that few other people even accept. People are bound to react to that and tell you he didn't dive.

If you say, 'If (hypothetically) one our own players cheated to gain a penalty, would you be happy with that?' then it's a completely different thread and you get a different response.

 

Personally I don't think the reaction of the players can give any indication as to whether or not it's a penalty. From a Barnsley perspective over the years, I've seen our players go batshit mental at some decisions against us that have been blatant penalties and hardly make murmur when we've been cheated. Depends on lots of things: the character of the individuals involved, instructions from the manager, the intensity of the game, the scoreline, at what point we are in the game, if the players already feel unjustly treated by the referee... it's not all about the decision. From my point of view Bird is clearly going down long before he reaches their defender and literally falls on top of the guy making the tackle. However, I also think the two penalties are largely irrelevant and we won the game due to two fantastic crosses by Barnes and two excellent pieces of predatory goal scoring by Bradshaw.

 

He did not dive , therefore your question is hypothetical

 

That's fair enough, and of course I realise that my "evidence" that it was a pen would not stand up in court if it were a legal issue. It was just the way I saw it, both live at full speed and in the highlights video at full and slow speeds.

But as you say, it was inconsequential in the context of the match. The reason for my posts is to defend one of our young lads against an accusation of cheating, which I don't agree with.

 

Your point was : "we have a cheater in the team" - ie Jared Bird.

No we don't.

 

I don't give a toss if he dived or not and I read the Guardian...

 

I hope he dived, and I hope it was the most unjust penalty ever.

In fact, I hope the ref was bought off by a betting syndicate.

Unlucky, Miwwo. Roflcopters.

 

I don't like cheating whether is for or against us and having seen it a few time on telly, it looked a very soft penalty and wouldn't have complained unduly if he'd been booked. I suspect the referee having realised he gave a bad decision against us for their penalty, which was clearly a superbly timed tackle (and compounded it by sending Hecky to the stands), just took the opportunity to even it up.

 

Even the pillock on MillwallTV said it was a stonewall penalty!

 

Looks like a penalty to me, it certainly wasn't a blatant dive from the angle shown on TV. I disagree with Jay about the players' reaction. I'm almost certain that Millwall players would have gone mad if they thought he'd cheated. That's the club they are, and the game was still in the balance. Even their idiot on Millwall TV said it was a stonewall penalty; what more proof do you need?

To accuse him of a blatant dive is absurd in my opinion.

 

This incident aside, I would hope that PH would have some strong words with any of our players that cheated. Somebody needs to make a stand... would like to think that might be us.

 

Had to watch it ten times to be sure, but it's a stonewall pen as the Millwall defender clearly knew...Archey's still shot gives the best clue, it's the Millwall players left leg that gets Bird not the right one that's outstretched. If you concentrate on the trailing leg you can see it fairly clearly .
Just to answer the original question....I don't want to see our players dive.

 

Does look a little bit dubious to me and diving is not something you want to see in the game but there is no way they deserved the penalty for Pearson's great challenge so its karma if you ask me

 

Is it still in the laws of the game that a penalty can be awarded if a challenge that does not win the ball causes the player in possession to take avoiding action? hardly ever given; last i can remember was Steve Gerard Vs Chris Morgan where the ref played advantage as Gerard rode the challenge and got a weak shot off which was easily saved.
If Jared had stayed on his feet he would have been wiped out anyway. His avoiding action saved him from possible injury.
Moot point anyway if it was given for a shirt pull.

 

One of the most nailed on stonewall pens I've ever seen. End of thread,

 

Exactly as I saw it in real time from behind the goal, Birds quick feet caught the defenders out and was taken out from the side.

Yet on the highlights it looks like a dive because he falls late. Just goes to show video technology can lie if your not at the correct angle.

 

if you look closely, the first first defender left a foot in, which made bird stumble. Second challenge finished him off. good decision, for once...

 

Don't think he dived although he was running into a bit of a cul-de-sac, if the Millwall defenders had just stood their ground we might have got a corner at best.