Just watched the highlights

Can't say it was a bad penalty - full credit to Ross Turnbull.

McCourt's run was a penalty, no doubt. Their player clipped his heels. He went down fairly easily but if their player puts a foot in, misses the ball and catches our player then that's a foul, right. That's how I've understood the rules of association football for the last 27 years or so.

 

Goalie dives low
Penalty along the ground , sorry poor pen from a good striker

 

That's exactly as I saw the pen in the Ponty, knew he wouldn't give it though. That's why missing the first was doubly bad

 

I couldn't make it out at the game but looking at the highlights it seems a blatant penalty. If you keep an eye on the defender that brings him rather than watching McCourt it's even more obvious. Lunges in, misses the ball, brings him down.

I forgot about Cywka's header. M'Voto's and O'Grady's were possibly even easier chances.

 

it wasn't the greatest pen you will ever see, but it was fairly hard and low in the corner - I would say it was more a good save than a bad miss. Having said that, he should have scored from his header in the second half wouldn't you say?

 

I think the exact rule, as described by Jonathan Pearce and several other clueless idiots who get employed to tell us how to watch a football match, is:

If there's any sort of contact, the striker has the right to fall to the floor, regardless of the amount of contact, the body parts used in the contact, or the contact made by the striker. Then if there is no contact whatsoever, their reaction is that they don't like to see that reaction from the player but its become part and parcel of the English game. If there's minimal contact, the striker has every right to simulate a reaction as he's obviously felt something (possibly the wind change). If it's a stonewall penalty, the striker is lucky to be alive and the defender lucky to be on the field.

Edit, I've just seen the highlights, I don't think it was a foul on Paddy. Jonathan Pearce on the other hand...