Replays clearly show that it should not have been a penalty to Brisbane in the final minute. It is very tough for refs when everybody else (viewers, commentators & coaches after the game) all get a second, third and fourth look!
Video ref needed? I would rather have the controversy than stop the game for a load of replay decisions!
It seems that if we could have had a bit more decision making come from the AR and perhaps the 4th official to override this decision it would have been what everyone expected.
But, when you watch it, you see the player make a tackle, or attempt to tackle from behind the player. Firstly, he seems to give the slightest push to the upper body. It seems that it was possible, just slightly possible, that the attempt to tackle the player from behind, and the slight push at the start putting him off, and, once he went to kick it, totally missing it, was all because there was an attempt to trip him or push him, but, only so very slightly.
The LOTG tell us attempting to trip is a free kick or penalty as much as tripping is. From where he attempted to tackle it seems there was no other reason for what he did other than to try and trip him so a penalty could be justified.
Of course, we often think that in the penalty area, it needs to be of a more serious nature than a trifling free kick somewhere near halfway though.
It does seem that the better answer for this was no penalty.
Post by Direstraits Referee on Apr 24, 2012 12:37:49 GMT 10
Soft penalty perhaps but nevertheless there was slight contact. It was good to see the referee being brave and going with his decision without fear or favour. Perhaps AR1 could have assisted more. From the replay shown on Fox Sports last night and from the referees angle you can see that he had a clear view and was not afraid to make this important decision.
Although this is a late response we must praise the excellent decision given by referee Jarred Gillett to award a penalty to Brisbane Roar at a crucial stage of the game. He was well positioned, firm with his decision and handled the situation extremely well for us to learn from. The Roar striker was obviously impeded when he was about to take a shot on goal because his left leg was the anchor/balance followed by the right leg follow through to strike the ball but because the balance was interfered with by the Perth Glory defender this supposedly caused the striker's air-swing attempt to kick the ball properly. JD's 2nd and 3rd paragraph comments are very valid in the decision equation and even an attempted trip from behind is unsportsmanship behaviour (misconduct) but a direct free kick or penalty may be given by the referee in accordance with Law 12, Direct Free Kicks. I support Johnny's last paragraph comment because if three match officials have missed something then let the game flow/continue.
After seeing the additional replays, not only was there my original suggestions of attempting to trip, but, a kick to the foot happened as well.
It seems that under the LOTG, the decision was more than correct for sure.
This is one of those things in the game no-one will ever get right it seems, and, even if you do, you still will not be right because the spectators and others expect something different when it comes to a penalty.
I suppose this type of decision highlights exactly why we turn up to meetings, we educate ourselves with upgrades to levels, and, we talk to other colleagues about decisions. So, when faced with decisions like this, we are ready to make them with the best knowledge.
Hopefully we start to see a few more questions on interpretations on the forum here for 2012.