Ref Review: The incorrect decisions from week 25

Date published: Monday 8th February 2016 3:09

Mathieu Flamini: Should have been sent off, say Ref Review panel

Mathieu Flamini: Should have been sent off, say Ref Review panel

Leicester City, Tottenham, Chelsea and Bournemouth suffered from bad refereeing decisions at the weekend, 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 25

Manchester City penalty appeal v Leicester City: Even after viewing several freeze-frames of the incident, nobody could say for certain whether Pablo Zabaleta was fouled by Christian Fuchs inside or outside of the area. The general consensus was that it was just outside but either way, there was no way the referee could give a penalty. Verdict: Correct decision

Manchester City goal v Leicester City: There was no such debate around Manchester City’s consolation goal on the day, however, with Sergio Aguero clearly offside when he headed in Bersant Celina’s cross. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Newcastle United disallowed goal v West Brom: Cheick Tiote could barely believe his luck to see his 25-yard strike ruled out – he suffered the exact same fate against Manchester City in 2014 – but Aleksandar Mitrovic clearly impeded the view of Ben Foster in the West Brom goal. Verdict: Correct decision

Everton penalty v Stoke City: It could be argued that Tom Cleverley slowed down to made sure he was fouled by Jack Butland, but what is certain is that the Stoke goalkeeper did not get the ball and took down the Everton midfielder. Verdict: Correct decision

Swansea City goal v Crystal Palace: Emmanuel Adebayor’s first major contribution as a Crystal Palace player was to concede a free-kick from which Gylfi Sigurdsson scored to put Swansea City ahead, but three out of five on our panel felt the referee had been too quick to blow his whistle. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Swansea City penalty appeal v Crystal Palace: Sometimes, these decisions even themselves out on the day, with Andre Ayew denied a penalty after being brought down by Pape Souare. The first foul took place outside of the area but, on the floor, Souare’s outstretched leg then took down Ayew inside the box. Four out of five on the panel felt a spot-kick should have been awarded. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Tottenham penalty appeal v Watford: Harry Kane had two penalty appeals in quick succession on Saturday, first when he was clipped from behind by Heurelho Gomes and then when he was held by Sebastian Prodl when attempting to score with his head. There was not enough contact made in the second incident to warrant a penalty, but all five of our panel felt Kane should have had a spot-kick when he took a thud into the back of his leg from Gomes. Verdict: Incorrect decision

West Ham penalty appeal v Southampton: A somewhat delayed reaction may have put the doubt into Mark Clattenburg’s mind, but Enner Valencia undoubtedly had his heels clipped by Maya Yoshida when chasing a ball inside the penalty area. There wasn’t total agreement, but three out of five on the panel felt a spot-kick should have been awarded. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Victor Wanyama red card v West Ham: This one really split the panel. All agreed that the tackle was not as bad as it looked, but Wanyama got nowhere near the ball, went over the top of it and could have hurt Dimitri Payet with his follow through. After much debate, a three-to-two majority decided Clattenburg was just about right to show the red card. Verdict: Correct decision

Sam Byram avoiding red card v Southampton There was much less debate regarding this decision, with everyone on the panel agreeing Byram was extremely fortune to avoid a straight red card for an over-the-ball stamp tackle on Ryan Bertrand. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Mathieu Flamini avoiding red card v Bournemouth: It wasn’t the ugliest of two-footed challenges you’ll ever see, but Flamini dived in with his studs showing and could easily have seriously injured Dan Gosling. The fact he won the ball counts for nothing. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Chelsea penalty appeal v Manchester United: These handball decisions continue to split opinion, but the fact that Daley Blind was so close to his own line when stopping John Terry’s goalbound shot convinced four out of five on the panel that referee Michael Oliver should have awarded a penalty. Verdict: Incorrect decision


For and Against

Team For Against Total For/Against
1. Man Utd Seven One +6
2. Liverpool Ten Five +5
= Man City Nine Four +5
4. Leicester Ten Six +4
5. Tottenham Six Three +3
= Sunderland Seven Four +3
7. Aston Villa Four Two +2
8. Arsenal Eight Seven +1
= Newcastle Five Four +1
10. Crystal Palace Three Three 0
= Watford Four Four 0
12. Everton One Two -1
= Southampton Six Seven -1
= Stoke Four Five -1
15. Norwich One Four -3
16. West Brom Five Nine -4
17. Chelsea Five Ten -5
= Swansea Four Nine -5
= West Ham Three Nine -6
19. Bournemouth Three Ten -7

Related Articles

Your Say

Home Forums Ref Review: The incorrect decisions from week 25

This topic contains 13 replies, has 9 voices, and was last updated by  TipTapGoal 11 months, 2 weeks ago.

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • Author
  • #851837

    Mark Holmes

    Leicester City, Tottenham, Chelsea and Bournemouth suffered from bad refereeing decisions at the weekend, according to our Ref Review panel.

    [See the full post at: Ref Review: The incorrect decisions from week 25]



    I know it’s only a bit of fun, but “but the fact that Daley Blind was so close to his own line when stopping John Terry’s goalbound shot convinced four out of five on the panel that referee Michael Oliver should have awarded a penalty”. Really? It’s a handball near the line, but not if it’s in the centre circle?



    Well, it really wasn’t handball and a penalty against Daley Blind. The arm which the ball hits is held across his chest. He had one arm out and one across his chest. If it hit the outstretched arm, then it’s a penalty. It hit the arm which was flush to his body.

    The rule is ‘deliberate’. He has to put his arms somewhere, and you don’t make a sliding block with your arms behind your back, it’s just not possible. Where else is he meant to put his arm? The arm it hit made no motion towards the ball, so it’s not deliberate, and it has to be deliberate.

    Thankfully, the man making the decisions has a better grasp of the rules.


    Mark Holmes

    Alfie, the thinking there was that Blind stopped a shot which may well have gone in. So accidental or not, surely that is denying a goalscoring opportunity and should be a penalty. We’ve said the same thing regarding quite a few similar incidents this season.



    The ball hit the arm that was in front of Blind’s body, and that arm was not stretched out.
    The ball would NOT have gone in if the arm wasn’t there, it would hit Blind in the chest.
    As Evratime said, if the ball had hit the outstretched arm, it should have been a pen, but it didn’t.
    The Teamtalk ladies are wrong in this case.



    Surely if the panel were watching they would of seen that it hit his left arm which was across his body. His right arm was in the air and did not come in contact with the ball so how could it be intentional? That is some feat to use one hand as a distraction to then commit handball with the other in the space of a couple of metres. If thats the case we best tell players that when making a wall they can’t cover their face or crown jewels otherwise it will be handball! Wrong call Teamtalk, you must of been Blind-sided. Sorry, couldn’t resist.



    Definitely a penalty as ad he not handled it, it would have gone in



    I’d be interested to know what offense you think Flamini should be sent off for. It sounds like, in your write up, you have given the exact description for dangerous play, yet the penalty for that is only yellow.

    “Could have caused serious injury” is not in the laws of the game, so citing it as a reason for a red card is ignorant.

    If you aren’t qualified to give these opinions then your subjective view isn’t really any better than the average fan.



    Flamini should have seen red for excessive force combined with lack of control & feet off the ground. It doesn’t matter that he won the ball.



    Its funny how football has changed in recent years. We’ve always spoken negatively about exessive force having suffered more than most with broken legs snd fractures.

    It is nice to see the rest of the league catch up but not predictable that an Arsenal player has been used to make the point.

    Apart from toledo, most arsenal fans have condemned the tackle – which is definitly a step in the right direction – would be nice for other teams fans to follow suit with their players.



    Mark – if you’ve judged other incidents the same then at least you’re being consistent, but I can’t help but think that the panel overreached with that decision. The handball rule is quite clear and to use a ‘denying a goal scoring opportunity’ argument (which sounds like it fits, but not if you read the laws of the game) seems like people are trying to find any phrase from the law book to show the ref was wrong rather than applying the obvious laws as they are written.


    Mark Holmes

    We didn’t use that phrase, Alfie, but I’m just trying to explain our thinkif to you.

    But the handball law is always going to cause debate because it’s such a grey area and comes down to interpretation so much. There are plenty of non-deliberate handballs penalised so it certainly isn’t as black and white as evratime suggests.



    No, it’s certainly not that black and white and on another day it could have easily been given. It’s one of those where you’d be unhappy if it was given against you but you’d be claiming it was a penalty if you were the attacking team.

    Given the handball rule though, I’m surprised 4 out of 5 people who reviewed it thought it was a penalty. It wasn’t deliberate, it was ball to hand and Blind was very close to where the ball was shoot from – all of which are explained in the rules as reasons why it was not handball.

    All about opinions though.



    Football rules might as well have been taken from the bible in that they’re so open to varying degrees of interpretation

    Just be pleased when decisions go for you and kick up as much as a stink as possible when they go against you

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)

You must be logged in to reply this topic.