If that was a penalty last night

Then the one we didn't get against the Fowls in the play off final definitely was. We should sue the FA and EFL and insist we get swapped with the fowls and start next season in the Championship.

 

Luck evens out. The fates - or the football authorities - do not conspire against England or BFC. It was nivver a penalty, but the luck fell our way this time and we'll take it!

 

Definitely a pen.. and this isn't a England England ra ra ra post.. high foot with studs showing.. would have been a foul every day of the the week halfway up the pitch. so pen all day.. look at the England players reaction closest to Kane. said it all.

 

This exactly. You see it every week, when a defender clears the ball and a forward tries to block. Defender kicks the forward and gets a free kick.

 

Not for me. We got lucky.

 

I think the defender was unlucky in that he made a genuine attempt to block the shot. However, there is no doubting that his studs were showing, it was a nano-second late and he caught Kane. Just one of those that ‘s sometimes given, sometimes not. Remember, intention doesn’t come into it now, if it’s deemed reckless then they usually get penalised.

 

Ok mate.. all about opinions.

 

What would people be saying if Kane's shot had gone in and the referee had then disallowed the goal and given a penalty?

 

No,happened too quick, ball would’ve been in back of net before ref could even get whistle to mouth.

 

If mi dad had never met mi mother.. we can imagine as many different scenarios as we want..

 

Definitely a penalty. A genuine play to block the ball but got it all wrong, went in with studs showing, reckless, and got none of the ball.

 

If outside the box it was a foul free kick and booking, raised studs.
So in the box the same but fortunately the outcome is different- penalty.

 

It most certainly wasn't reckless. It was soft as *****. Am I watching something else?

 

A floppy c o ck.

 

I'd go as far as questioning unlucky... because he found himself in no man's land; not tight enough to challenge Kane properly but too close to block without making dangerous studs up contact. He has himself to blame for poor defending.

England were still lucky to have it given though

 

Going in with your studs up is just about as reckless as it gets.

 

I refer to sadbrewer's response.

 

He doesn't even initiate the contact. Kanes foot follows through and hits the defenders foot. He literally puts his leg up to block the shot and then Kane kicks him after shooting. I agree with Carra and Neville. Perhaps its just a striker v defender mentality but I can completely understand the huge outroar about it. Was never, ever clear and obvious - evident by the amount of people saying it was a shocker of a decision. Just my opinion ofcourse. When I watch it back perhaps I'll change me mind.

 

I really don't get this at all.

I said at the time he's got to give that. Not because I agree it should be a penalty, but the rules are clear. If you lead with raised studs, it's a foul. In actual fact if you lead with raised studs and make contact it's technically a red card offense. Agree or not, once it was VAR checked the ref had no choice.

I always remember that red card Nani got for Man Utd years ago. He was watching the ball and brought his foot up to control it. Opposing player ran across and was hit by the studs. Red card. To me it was brutally harsh but it emphasises that these rules on raising the studs have been around for years.

 

No pen last night for me' big difference in last night and the play off final was that last night Kane kicked the defender in his follow through whereas in the play off final Gregory directly kicked Kitchings foot' penalty all day' i suspect that all the people saying it was a pen last night would have been up in arms had it been given against us' we'll gladly take it though..