Penalties…what can we do?

[BCFCGav]

I wonder if Wells should have stayed down holding his face? But it’s ridiculous we’re having to try and find ways to be awarded penalties, the referee should just do his job. 
 

Live I thought the pull was the worst of the two, but on replay that high boot is nailed on. 

[REDOXO]

8 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

@Bs4Red the relevant parts of the Laws are as above, which I posted earlier. @BTRFTG has ably summarised them as well.

There's no requirement for contact in the Laws and an attempt to kick an opponent is just as serious as actually kicking them. This results in a direct free kick, and if it occurs in the box then it's a penalty.

The high kick is a stonewall, definite penalty.

The shirt pull I accept there's more debate over, but in my opinion on a strict reading of the Laws it is also a penalty.

I once gave a penalty for a goalkeeper coming out, sliding out with his studs up into the on coming forward. The forward managed, just, to get out of the way, but the foul was clear. 
 

At ht I had the manager asking me why I had given the peno as there was no contact. Oh dear! 

[sh1t_ref_again]

3 hours ago, Olé said:

Building on my last bit of penalty geekery on OTIB: 

 

Of the 108 teams to have played since the start of LAST season in either the EFL Championship or one of Europe's big 5 leagues, City are the 11th most fouled, have had 30th most touches in opposition boxes, but rank dead last for penalties awarded.

 

 

Thank you for some great work and effort. It would be interesting to also see the data rather than just the rank, for example Swansea would look to be as bad or worse than us from the tables, as ranked 102 for penalties just below us but the 3rd most fouled, so above us, but if they have had 2 or 3 penalties gives a different complexation, when doing the ratio of touches v fouls in box / penalties. I know your chart tries to reflect this, but its difficult to see how many penalties teams have had, could reflect it by adding penalties to show up with name perhaps?

Edit - just seen 2nd, chart touches per penalty which helps

Edited November 13, 2022 by sh1t_ref_again

[Bat Fastard]

19 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Add the high foot one to the list of stonewallers then. The Laws are so clear.

In a match at Ashton Gate, Freeman was sent off for a high boot.  We don't even get a foul, let alone a penalty.

[tin]

17 hours ago, Supersonic Robin said:

I've had similar thoughts. I'm not necessarily suggesting there is a conspiracy against us, but "bad luck" isn't a sufficient explanation anymore. Our penalty situation is so improbable that it borders on impossible.

It really is at a point where I feel action is required. I think your suggestion is a very reasonable one. At the very least, I'd like us to try and drum up a bit of noise about it, such that every Championship referee looks at a fixture for us and goes "Ah, Bristol City, that's the club that's constantly putting pressure on us about the lack of penalties we award them".

I actually am beginning to think it is some sort of conspiracy, either against the club or Nige. I’m a betting man and the odds you would get on us going this long without a penalty would be huge. It’s absolutely absurd, especially after the latest one in a long line (the high foot on Wells) yesterday. 

[sh1t_ref_again]

Would be good if someone was able to put together a "if only we VAR or a decent Ref" video compilation of the not given to us and dodgy given against, just so we can all wally in our self pity, you never know perhaps someone outside the club will look at it and say WTF

[Harry]

4 hours ago, Cowshed said:

 

Focus on behaviours that make success more likely. Don’t wee yourself about it (penalties)  Back to focus on behaviours that make success more likely those controllables of possession, chance creation versus the uncontrollables e.g. refs who are not out to get Bristol City. 

 

I wasn’t weeing myself about it. 
Just thinking of how we can influence. 
I don’t think refs are out to get us. I just think we need to get some awareness of our predicament and get into their heads. 

If we make referees aware of this massive anomaly, they might be influenced when making a tight call on the pitch. 
 

That one on Wells yesterday. I wonder if a ref who’d been subtly reminded that we’ve only had 2 penalties in nearly 3 seasons, might have that extra 1 or 2 percent favourable influence in his head and award it. Could be all it takes. Refs are human too, and can be subject to influence. 
 

I don’t think we’re victims of a conspiracy, and I’m not crying about it, but you have to admit, it’s a massive anomaly and I think we’d be right to get this highlighted to the world and particularly the world of officialdom. 

[Cowshed]

1 minute ago, Harry said:

I wasn’t weeing myself about it. 
Just thinking of how we can influence. 
I don’t think refs are out to get us. I just think we need to get some awareness of our predicament and get into their heads. 

If we make referees aware of this massive anomaly, they might be influenced when making a tight call on the pitch. 
 

That one on Wells yesterday. I wonder if a ref who’d been subtly reminded that we’ve only had 2 penalties in nearly 3 seasons, might have that extra 1 or 2 percent favourable influence in his head and award it. Could be all it takes. Refs are human too, and can be subject to influence. 
 

I don’t think we’re victims of a conspiracy, and I’m not crying about it, but you have to admit, it’s a massive anomaly and I think we’d be right to get this highlighted to the world and particularly the world of officialdom. 

Are you sure about that? Or might they not?  

No I wouldnt. Focusing on what you control versus negative noise, solutions versus excuses, is a superior path.  

[Banjo Red]

1 hour ago, tin said:

I actually am beginning to think it is some sort of conspiracy, either against the club or Nige. I’m a betting man and the odds you would get on us going this long without a penalty would be huge. It’s absolutely absurd, especially after the latest one in a long line (the high foot on Wells) yesterday. 

I think it is, as he in the past has been very out spoken about how poor the officials are. The fact we had a grovelling letter from the Hull game wouldn't have gone down with the ref's association and the fa are just corrupt.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Harry said:

I wasn’t weeing myself about it. 
Just thinking of how we can influence. 
I don’t think refs are out to get us. I just think we need to get some awareness of our predicament and get into their heads. 

If we make referees aware of this massive anomaly, they might be influenced when making a tight call on the pitch. 
 

That one on Wells yesterday. I wonder if a ref who’d been subtly reminded that we’ve only had 2 penalties in nearly 3 seasons, might have that extra 1 or 2 percent favourable influence in his head and award it. Could be all it takes. Refs are human too, and can be subject to influence. 
 

I don’t think we’re victims of a conspiracy, and I’m not crying about it, but you have to admit, it’s a massive anomaly and I think we’d be right to get this highlighted to the world and particularly the world of officialdom. 

Also, what makes Andi Weimann’s a handball off a ball coming over his shoulder that he’s trying to control on the half volley and the Watford player’s not a handball when he visibly moves his body and arm towards it?  It’s inconsistent decisions like that in the same game (and obviously the same ref) that do my head in.

[mozo]

3 hours ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Would be good if someone was able to put together a "if only we VAR or a decent Ref" video compilation of the not given to us and dodgy given against, just so we can all wally in our self pity, you never know perhaps someone outside the club will look at it and say WTF

I think by the 3rd hour it was get rather boring...

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 hours ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Would be good if someone was able to put together a "if only we VAR or a decent Ref" video compilation of the not given to us and dodgy given against, just so we can all wally in our self pity, you never know perhaps someone outside the club will look at it and say WTF

Not just penalties denied either.

This season alone, the one at Hull- plus...

1) The failure to send Bennett off at Wigan...

2) ..The failure to either send off Freeman or before that, call a foul on Sykes when he was sandwiched just before he saw red- if that foul was called, Sykes wouldn't have flown into the tackle.

3) Potentially, although not so certain the Dieng handball outside the box- although it's possible he was just inside.

4) Sheffield United, was there a foul or an offside in the build-up to their winner?

5) Sheffield United Part 2- Norwood on Williams.

For balance , how many have gone in our favour this season. Not penalties of course but how many big "Phew, got away with that one" have we had...can't think of any right now but there must be some.

Ah and forgot, checked- one of the QPR goals was potentially offside.

Now, I recall Palmer scored a goal that shouldn't have been at home v Fulham in September 2021 but at the same time, Chalobah was it, should have received the 2nd yellow at 0-0 in 1st half- he did not and was substituted.

Edited November 13, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Harry]

4 hours ago, Cowshed said:

Are you sure about that? Or might they not?  

No I wouldnt. Focusing on what you control versus negative noise, solutions versus excuses, is a superior path.  

Of course everyone should control the controllables, but should we not also attempt to influence others? 
But you are seemingly of the opinion that a referee can’t be influenced. 
If that’s the case then why do any players/fans/coaches etc make ANY appeals at all? 
When you played/coach, have you never called for a foul or a handball or a penalty? Of course you have. Surely in doing so, you are attempting to raise an infringement to the referees attention. 

There is no difference in a) making an appeal for a decision on the pitch, to b) putting some influence into the referees mind off of the pitch. 

[MarcusX]

On 13/11/2022 at 06:04, ExiledAjax said:

@Bs4Red the relevant parts of the Laws are as above, which I posted earlier. @BTRFTG has ably summarised them as well.

There's no requirement for contact in the Laws and an attempt to kick an opponent is just as serious as actually kicking them. This results in a direct free kick, and if it occurs in the box then it's a penalty.

The high kick is a stonewall, definite penalty.

The shirt pull I accept there's more debate over, but in my opinion on a strict reading of the Laws it is also a penalty.

Did the defender attempt to kick Wells or attempt to kick the ball? 

The attempt to kick a player portion is about a delibarate attempt to kick, trip or pull back a player. It's specifically about someone attempting to bring a player down and failing (eg a professional foul) can still be a free kick even if no contact made (and a yellow or red card)

The more it's discussed the more I'd lean towards an indirect free kick if there was no contact (impeding the progress of a player without contact), or a penalty if there was contact - which I thought there was

[MarcusX]

23 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

I wonder if Wells should have stayed down holding his face? But it’s ridiculous we’re having to try and find ways to be awarded penalties, the referee should just do his job. 
 

Live I thought the pull was the worst of the two, but on replay that high boot is nailed on. 

He did didn't he?

[hertsexile]

Let’s face it the standard of officials is so poor in the championship and the EFL. 
Big Nigel has said so often enough and got fined for his trouble. 
The high boot on Wells is not only dangerous play it could have caused injury to his eye. I ask the question why does the linesman not raise his Flag he would have had a clear line of sight ! In fact apart from waving a flag when the ball ️ goes out of play do they actually make any decisions if so have not noticed it at Ashton Gate for sometime! 

[BCFCGav]

1 hour ago, MarcusX said:

He did didn't he?

He went down and claimed but I mean like feign a head injury or something. Never a good thing to see but we’ve tried everything else

[Olé]

23 hours ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

It would be interesting to also see the data rather than just the rank, for example Swansea would look to be as bad or worse than us from the tables, as ranked 102 for penalties just below us but the 3rd most fouled, so above us, but if they have had 2 or 3 penalties gives a different complexion

Here you go - for Championship only.

In addition to since start of last season, I've also included the data for over the last 3 seasons where we're still worst by ratio to touches in the box, albeit at least in the same ballpark as one other club.

Swansea has had two penalties since the start of last season, but on fewer touches in the box. They are fouled a lot but it is easier to explain that as they're not a direct side and play out from the back.

[Bazooka Joe]

I think we're paying the penalty for the proliferation of atrocious, incompetent referees and referees' assistants officiating in the Championship.

To put things right in the future maybe we could request a special hearing to state our case and back it up with undisputable evidence.

If this fails, we could always appeal !

[Bazooka Joe]

4 minutes ago, Olé said:

Here you go - for Championship only.

In addition to since start of last season, I've also included the data for over the last 3 seasons where we're still worst by ratio to touches in the box, albeit at least in the same ballpark as one other club.

Swansea has had two penalties since the start of last season, but on fewer touches in the box. They are fouled a lot but it is easier to explain that as they're not a direct side and play out from the back.

Pretty conclusive evidence IMO.

Wouldn't surprise me to learn we have the highest TIB/Pen ratio in the whole of the English League, possibly Europe, or worse still, the entire world.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

50 minutes ago, Olé said:

Here you go - for Championship only.

In addition to since start of last season, I've also included the data for over the last 3 seasons where we're still worst by ratio to touches in the box, albeit at least in the same ballpark as one other club.

Swansea has had two penalties since the start of last season, but on fewer touches in the box. They are fouled a lot but it is easier to explain that as they're not a direct side and play out from the back.

Excellent work again @Olé

Although some of these sides and their stats might have taken place in PL and League 1? Different standard's, thresholds levels of dominance etc..

The Championship perennials well that could be like a sub-table or graph would probably state our case further ie those in the Championship from 2020-21 to present.

Edited November 14, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Bs4Red]

On 13/11/2022 at 09:40, ExiledAjax said:

The problem is that contact does create a direct free kick offence, but it's not a requirement for one.

People focus on contact or no contact as that's easier, but you don't have to have contact. IIRC we saw that with the Hull penalty against us back in August. Contact was minimal, but it was seen as a careless/reckless attempt to trip the Hull player, and so it was a penalty.

No it was a penalty because there was contact. You literally just said that. 

[Bs4Red]

On 13/11/2022 at 06:04, ExiledAjax said:

@Bs4Red the relevant parts of the Laws are as above, which I posted earlier. @BTRFTG has ably summarised them as well.

There's no requirement for contact in the Laws and an attempt to kick an opponent is just as serious as actually kicking them. This results in a direct free kick, and if it occurs in the box then it's a penalty.

The high kick is a stonewall, definite penalty.

The shirt pull I accept there's more debate over, but in my opinion on a strict reading of the Laws it is also a penalty.

No, because the player hasn’t attempted to kick or actually kicked him. He’s attempted to kick the ball. 

It’s a matter of opinion for each person. You can not agree but as a qualified ref I’d be happy to stick with my opinion 

[Bs4Red]

An indirect free kick is awarded if a player:

• plays in a dangerous manner
• impedes the progress of an opponent without any contact being made
   
• Again without contact it’s nearly impossible a ref would ever give a penalty for this

[Bs4Red]

On 13/11/2022 at 08:27, 1960maaan said:

What like these *rules ? 
From 

What constitutes a dangerous play in soccer?

Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.

*******

1. Direct free kick

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

* Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned

* Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed

 

In your 'rules' are you allowed to throw a punch, but you only get sent off if you connect ? And Nakhi has to lose an an before you get a free kick. I've seen plenty of free kicks where no contact is made and fouls given, and a fair few goals chalked off for dangerous play from an overhead kick

 

*laws 

PLAYING IN A DANGEROUS MANNER

Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.

A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that it is not dangerous to an opponent.

IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF AN OPPONENT WITHOUT CONTACT

Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.

All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.

 

 

 

again you are wrong you clown but please continue to make a fool of yourself 

[Bs4Red]

2 hours ago, MarcusX said:

Did the defender attempt to kick Wells or attempt to kick the ball? 

The attempt to kick a player portion is about a delibarate attempt to kick, trip or pull back a player. It's specifically about someone attempting to bring a player down and failing (eg a professional foul) can still be a free kick even if no contact made (and a yellow or red card)

The more it's discussed the more I'd lean towards an indirect free kick if there was no contact (impeding the progress of a player without contact), or a penalty if there was contact - which I thought there was

Someone who finally understands.
 

attempted to play the ball + no contact 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Was there no contact on Wells? Watched it back a couple of times...

Indirect free kick at the very least no? What about the defender, should he have been carded.

[1960maaan]

9 minutes ago, Bs4Red said:

PLAYING IN A DANGEROUS MANNER

Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.

A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that it is not dangerous to an opponent.

IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF AN OPPONENT WITHOUT CONTACT

Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.

All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.

 

 

 

again you are wrong you clown but please continue to make a fool of yourself 

Bored with this , I like discussions where I might be right or wrong and not get into childish name calling 

My bit was taken from the same site , and in my opinion was dangerous/reckless . Even by your choice of law, it says indirect free kick and studs up at head height I still say is dangerous. As I said before, goals have been disallowed for dangerous play so it is clearly an offence.

To finish, I've been on a Referee forum and this same thing was mentioned. The result was ...

It all depends on whether there is contact or not. Contact = Penalty, No contact = Indirect Free Kick 

And a booking. 

 

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, Bs4Red said:

No, because the player hasn’t attempted to kick or actually kicked him. He’s attempted to kick the ball. 

It’s a matter of opinion for each person. You can not agree but as a qualified ref I’d be happy to stick with my opinion 

No, no, I can respect the opinion of a qualified referee, of course I can. Thanks for the clarification as it explains the referee's view (assuming he agrees with you) as to why it might not be a pen. @MarcusX pointed it out as well so thanks there too.

When I was making my earlier posts I was of the view that the defender could be considered to be attempting to kick Wells rather than the ball. But I understand that this is assuming the worst rather than the best intention. Are refs told to give the benefit of the doubt to the defender?

Your other post highlights the dangerous play. So in your opinion should we have had an indirect free kick?

[Bs4Red]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

No, no, I can respect the opinion of a qualified referee, of course I can. Thanks for the clarification as it explains the referee's view (assuming he agrees with you) as to why it might not be a pen. @MarcusX pointed it out as well so thanks there too.

When I was making my earlier posts I was of the view that the defender could be considered to be attempting to kick Wells rather than the ball. But I understand that this is assuming the worst rather than the best intention. Are refs told to give the benefit of the doubt to the defender?

Your other post highlights the dangerous play. So in your opinion should we have had an indirect free kick?

I would say it’s a massive grey area, if I was playing and that’s given against me I’m fuming. If it isn’t given for me you’re fuming. Just a massive catch 22. In my opinion it’s dangerous isn’t it. 
Personally I’d be happy with nothing given as long as consistent