Ref Review: The incorrect decisions from week 22

Date published: Monday 18th January 2016 2:28

Philipp Wollscheid: Could have been penalised for tripping Theo Walcott

Philipp Wollscheid: Could have been penalised for tripping Theo Walcott

Everton and Arsenal suffered from incorrect decisions against Chelsea and Stoke City, according to our Ref Review panel.

Refereeing decisions are regularly the source of debate among fans, pundits, players and managers so this season a five-strong TEAMtalk panel will be passing judgement on every red card (or avoidance of one), every penalty and any other major incident every weekend.

We’ll also keep a tally of the major decisions to go for and against each team in an attempt to settle the never-ending debate about whether certain clubs are favoured more than others by Premier League referees.

Week 22

Tottenham penalty v Sunderland: A bad debut for Jan Kirchhoff was completed when he tripped Danny Rose, with even Sam Allardyce admitting it was a penaltyVerdict: Correct decision

Declan Rudd avoiding red card v Bournemouth: Rudd took down Benik Afobe as he ran through on goal, but the Bournemouth striker was running well away from goal with Sebastian Bassong running back to cover, making the yellow card the correct decision according to our panel. Verdict: Correct decision

Bournemouth penalty v Norwich City: It was soft, but referee Robert Madley had little alternative but to point to the spot when Vadis Odjidja stupidly pulled back Marc Pugh in the box. Verdict: Correct decision

John Terry goal v Everton: Roberto Martinez had no room to complain about the amount of time added on after Everton’s earlier stoppage-time goal, but the Toffees boss was certainly right to feel aggrieved that the assistant referee did not spot Terry was in an offside position when flicking home Chelsea’s late equaliser. Verdict: Incorrect decision

West Brom penalty appeal v Southampton: Tony Pulis argued after the game that his side should have had a penalty when Crag Gardner was kicked over by James Ward-Prowse, but replays showed the foul occurred just outside of the box. Verdict: Correct decision (not to give a penalty)

Southampton penalty v West Brom: This was another somewhat soft penalty, but Matt Targett was always going to draw a foul from Craig Dawson after getting goalside of the Albion defender. Referee Martin Atkinson had no choice. Verdict: Correct decision

Leicester City penalty v Aston Villa: All three major decisions in Saturday evening’s game at Villa Park split the panel. The first, which saw Aly Cissokho penalised for handball, went three to two in favour of the referee on the basis that Riyad Mahrez’s shot may well have otherwise hit the back of the net. Verdict: Correct decision

Aston Villa penalty appeal v Leicester City: The panel voted in favour of the referee’s decision with this one too. Robert Huth undoubtedly put an arm across Libor Kozak, but the Aston Villa forward was looking for the spot-kick in the eyes of three out of the five on our panel. Verdict: Correct decision

Rudy Gestede v Leicester City: The referee got out backing here too, with only one member of the panel arguing play should have been called back when Gestede’s poor touch saw the ball hit his hand before he scored Villa’s equaliser. Verdict: Correct decision

Marouane Fellaini avoiding red card v Liverpool: Lucas was adamant that he had been stamped on by Fellaini in Sunday’s game at Anfield, but the Manchester United midfielder did not appear to make any contact. That does not excuse his actions, of course, but only one member of the panel felt it was worthy of a red card. Verdict: Correct decision

Theo Walcott penalty appeal v Stoke City: After initially being pulled back by Philipp Wollscheid on the edge of the box, Walcott then had the back of his leg clipped by the Stoke defender inside the area. It was accidental, but our panel unaminously agreed a penalty should have been awarded. Verdict: Incorrect decision

For and Against

Team For Against Total For/Against
1. Leicester Ten Five +5
= Man Utd Six One +5
3. Liverpool Nine Five +4
= Man City Eight Four +4
= Tottenham Five One +4
6. Aston Villa Three One +2
= Sunderland Six Four +2
8. Newcastle Five Four +1
9. Arsenal Six Seven -1
= Crystal Palace One Two -1
= Everton One Two -1
= Norwich One Two -1
= Southampton Five Six -1
= Stoke Four Five -1
=Watford Three Four -1
16. Chelsea Five Eight -3
17. West Brom Four Eight -4
18. Bournemouth Three Eight -5
= Swansea Three Eight -5
20. West Ham Two Eight -6

Related Articles

Your Say


Home Forums Ref Review: The incorrect decisions from week 22

This topic contains 9 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  liverpool_1986 9 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
  • #802082
    Mark Holmes
    Mark Holmes

    Everton and Arsenal suffered from incorrect decisions against Chelsea and Stoke City, according to our Ref Review panel.

    [See the full post at: Ref Review: The incorrect decisions from week 22]


    Stephen Nelson

    Sorry but for once I categorically disagree with your assessment of southampton’s penalty against WBA. Dawson was running in a straight line and targett moved across him and was never in possession of the ball. He didn’t move towards the ball as it ran past him instead putting his leg across Dawson and bringing them both down. Correct verdict should have been a foul on Dawson.

    Despite this it doesn’t forgive a truly dire performance from WBA.

    Mark Holmes
    Mark Holmes

    Stephen, they’re the most frustrating penalties to concede. Targett ‘won’ it as opposed to Dawson conceding it. Unfortunately, defenders know they simply can’t make contact once they’re the wrong side – I agree with you and wish penalties were given out less easily, but Southampton’s was undoubtedly a penalty according to today’s interpretation of the rules.


    I’m sure that there must have been several other decisions and hardships that Arsenal suffered. No doubt they will be pointed out to us soon.


    Stephen Nelson

    ‘Today’s interpretation’ now there’s a phrase to cover a multitude of sins. Consistency – there’s another word or maybe it should be called a pipe dream. Maybe if hell does in fact freeze over we’ll finally get video replays! Which by your own position in this circumstance probably wouldn’t have done us any favours any way!

    We may as well come out and say it – that cheating is part and parcel of football. It’s just infuriating when penalties are ‘won’ by certain teams but other teams can have items of clothing physically removed from their bodies and the flamboyant referee can wave appeals away with such frustrating certainty (despite being horrendously wrong – I’m looking at you Mike Dean) time and again. I for one welcome video replays as well as stronger sanctions against players ‘winning’, ‘simulating’, ‘cheating’ or whatever else you want to call it.

    Oh and a preemptive yellow for Diego Costa before he walks on the pitch 😉

    It’s a strange position to be in but as your own list has shown over the weeks WBA generally seem to get the rough end of the stick where decisions are concerned (along with others). I have wondered if the complaints that the club has lodged against certain refs in the past have contributed to less than favourable decisions.

    Nice to see Chelsea players come out and toe the ‘WBA long ball’ line again despite a great performance…par for the course though after their shoddy display.

    Anyway, you don’t need to reply. I just had to vent a bit. Thanks for reading 😉



    I don’t know why I’m surprised that only one member of the panel thought that a clearly deliberate stamp on a Liverpool player deserved a red card. Fellaini could have wielded a sword and cut off lucas’ leg and this panel would still find excuses, as long as it’s against Liverpool. It’s starting to become embarrassing how biased you can be.


    RE: Villa’s penalty claim – so what if he was looking for the penalty? Of course he was, it’s not outside of the boundary of the law to draw on a foul. The fact of the matter is that flinging your arm out in the direction of an opposing layer’s face is a foul. No matter how you look at it.

    If the arm wasn’t out, Kozak wouldn’t have had to go down. By the way, I don’t think that he did go down that softly. Reckless, illegal contact was made with his face.

    Penalty all day.



    6 Villa-players inside the box when the penalty was taken also. The penalty could easily been retaken, as the rule only says: no players are allowed to be inside of the box before the ball is touched, therefore an infringement( I’m wondering what the ref was even looking at when he observed that penalty-kick.


    Mancity Jim

    Liverpool 1986 fwiw I thought it was a deliberate stamp by Felaini and if the ref didn’t see it it deserved a retrospective ban. If it had been Balotelli everyone would be calling for his head. Felaini is one of those players who plays dirty but just seems to get away with it. Jim



    Cheers Mancity Jim – it was a blatant stamp as per usual from Fellaini. Liverpool are not the only team to suffer from poor refs when this guy is involved. He should be sent off every other game for his deliberate elbows, headbuts, kicks, stamps etc but the refs seem to want to ignore it all.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

You must be logged in to reply this topic.