Brighton 2nd penalty

[MikeTheCubed]

It didn't appear to be deliberate and did not effect play but it appeared to glance off his shoulder and may have grazed his hand as it fell. The lino was looking straight at it and wasted no time in upping the flag. All in all, a penalty. The first one looked a bit enhanced as he fell as if someone cut his legs off. Had it happened at Old Trafford with Sir Alex in charge, it wouldn't have been called.

If it didn't appear to be deliberate then it's not a penalty. This is the law of the game.

[YankeeJim]

It didn't appear to be deliberate and did not effect play but it appeared to glance off his shoulder and may have grazed his hand as it fell. The lino was looking straight at it and wasted no time in upping the flag. All in all, a penalty. The first one looked a bit enhanced as he fell as if someone cut his legs off. Had it happened at Old Trafford with Sir Alex in charge, it wouldn't have been called.

If it didn't appear to be deliberate then it's not a penalty. This is the law of the game.

Law of the game? Probert was the law of the game and he stood with his lino. When I ref'd (granted they were teenagers so hardly pros) I called it if it was deliberate and if it effected play. Mitro lost sight of the ball. It shouldn't have been called but Prem refs will call that every time.

[Denver Fulham]

Guys, he controlled the ball with his arm in the box. There's nothing to debate here. It's a penalty 100 times out of 100.

[YankeeJim]

Guys, he controlled the ball with his arm in the box. There's nothing to debate here. It's a penalty 100 times out of 100.

Control is a strong word. It did hit his arm but there was no attempt to control the ball.

[The Rock]

I thought the penalty was awarded because he controlled it with his lower shoulder. Below the shoulder blade.

Didn't know he purposely handled the ball.

[bornafulhamfan]

As someone said above the main question is would you want us to be awarded a penalty in the same situation, and for me the answer is yes, definitely. Mitro had a great game and as Slav said, things like that(the penalty) happen. We have to move on to the next game. COYW

[filham]

It was a stonewall (and silly) penalty. The ball clearly was controlled by his arm in the box, under no pressure.

That is how I saw it on the TV replays. Bad play by Mitrovic.

[Denver Fulham]

Guys, he controlled the ball with his arm in the box. There's nothing to debate here. It's a penalty 100 times out of 100.

Control is a strong word. It did hit his arm but there was no attempt to control the ball.

Of course there was. He was trying to chest the ball down and misjudged it and settled it with his arm. Not sure why this is even a discussion. Unfortunate mistake under no pressure, but certain penalty.

[gezkc]

Guys, he controlled the ball with his arm in the box. There's nothing to debate here. It's a penalty 100 times out of 100.

Control is a strong word. It did hit his arm but there was no attempt to control the ball.

The result was that the ball was controlled by his arm.

Whether he consciously attempted to do that or not is debatable, but that's what happened.

[Baszab]

But it has to be deliberate rather than just a mistake - too fine a line to call really - the ref was a homer all match

[WelshWhite67]

It was a stonewall penalty!
Ridiculous mistake from Mitro who was under no pressure!
First goal was also a terrible mistake from Le Marchand.
A good away point but it could & should have been 3 points!
Onwards & upwards!
COYW

[fulhamben]

But it has to be deliberate rather than just a mistake - too fine a line to call really - the ref was a homer all match

looked deliberate to me. Misjudged the flight completely and ended up in the wrong position and didn't realise he had time. Could of easily not had his arm where it was as it was a looping ball.

[Whitesideup]

It was definitely a penalty unfortunately. As the ball came down Mitro got it under control with the top of his arm -whether it was 100% intentional is debatable, but it had to be given.

If it's not intentional then it's not a penalty.

He should not have had his arms in the unnatural position they were in. I think he misjudged the flight of the ball and instead of catching on his chest, it struck his outstretched arm. I think it was his arm and not his shoulder, and therefore was given. The ref is within his rights to think that even if he did not intend to use his arm, it was only there in case of such a misjudgement or miscontrol.

[WokinghamWhite]

Yes. The first penalty should never have happened because it came from continued play after a clear offside by Murray. But the second was definitely a penalty. On the plus side if you'd offered me a draw from that match before kick-off I'd have taken it.

[Mince n Tatties]

Of course its a penalty.
If that was at the other end and we never got it,the screams on here would be deafening.😱

[toshes mate]

If it's not intentional then it's not a penalty.

The only truth I can see written in all the above.  If the ball touches any part of the arm from shoulder down unintentionally then it is not a penalty.  Unfortunately and throughout football this mere detail has been swept aside by referees who are clearly under pressure whenever controversy looms.  In my books it was harsh but they are given these days which doesn't mean it is correct interpretation.

[Andyb]

Just seen it what a howler....

[bornafulhamfan]

Yes. The first penalty should never have happened because it came from continued play after a clear offside by Murray. But the second was definitely a penalty. On the plus side if you'd offered me a draw from that match before kick-off I'd have taken it.

We said before the Burnley game we would be thrilled with four points from the following two games and that's what happened. Next month is probably our toughest month of the year, though.

[Stoneleigh Loyalist]

The referee was not biased.
The only biased people are those on this board with a natural love for Fulham and did not think that it was a penalty.
Leave it and get on with another subject.

[grandad]

Having watched many replays it was the sort of penalty more home sides get than away ones. It was the easy way out for a poor ref . He saw what he wanted to see, unlike the blatant offside leading up to the 1st pen. He also failed to see the the huge number of times Murray conned him into giving free kicks. & the many times Mitro  was clambered over with nothing given.