City v Spurs

[Ryanj91]

For their penalty, was it actually a penalty?

Gundogan with a poor touch and then plants his foot on Hojbjerg's ankle (which surely is a foul?)
Then in that motion, Hojbjerg clips Gundogan's other foot.

Doesn't the first foul cancel out the trip?

 

[es1]

I thought it was soft and didnt think it was

But my mates who support united all think it's a stonewaller

 

[Ryanj91]

I thought it was soft and didnt think it was

But my mates who support united all think it's a stonewaller

They are used to Fernandes falling over all the time... Makes sense

 

[Matthew]

I thought it was soft at the time and even after watching a few replays I can't quite work out how the contact has come about - trapping the ball and cutting back is something Gundogan does every game and it looks like he's got it wrong, failed to trap the ball and the defender has clumsily bundled into him.

Oddly enough @es1, I was also the only one in the group chat (all non-City fans) who didn't think it was stonewall.

 

[es1]

Perhaps it's like the (future hypothetical for me) scenario where you ref your son or daughter's team and are subconsciously biased against them whilst trying to be neutral!

Things need to be even more of a foul for you to give it

 

[Ryanj91]

Perhaps it's like the (future hypothetical for me) scenario where you ref your son or daughter's team and are subconsciously biased against them whilst trying to be neutral!

Things need to be even more of a foul for you to give it

Thing is gundogan made the first contact (pretty nasty as well) on H's ankle... That's what I don't get... Imo that is a foul if anything in the whole scenario.

 

[es1]

Thing is gundogan made the first contact (pretty nasty as well) on H's ankle... That's what I don't get... Imo that is a foul if anything in the whole scenario.

Well that I don't see

 

[Ryanj91]

Well that I don't see

You didn't see it? Or you don't think it's a foul?

 

[es1]

You didn't see it? Or you don't think it's a foul?

I don't see gundogan making any contact/initiating any contact with hberg

Calling it nasty as well is miles off the mark too

 

[Ryanj91]

Studs on top of his ankle.

That contact is made first before H on G.

Accidentally - but defo nasty

 

[es1]

H

Studs on top of his ankle.

That contact is made first before H on G.

Accidentally - but defo nasty
View attachment 4791

I've literally no idea what you're talking about

 

[Ryanj91]

H

I've literally no idea what you're talking about

Another angle for ya..

Or 0.39 and watch Gundogan's foot plant on H on his ankle.

 

[es1]

View attachment 4792
Another angle for ya..

Or 0.39 and watch Gundogan's foot plant on H on his ankle.

The more you make me watch it, the more I think it's a clear pen

 

[Ryanj91]

The more you make me watch it, the more I think it's a clear pen

Ok fair enough, everyone has their own opinion.

I honestly thought VAR would have overturned it as Gundogan clearly makes the first contact - studs down Hojbjerg's ankle.
The little clip after - yeah penalty, but Gundogan's action was first.

I'm an arsenal fan, so sticking up for a spurs player is something I prefer not to do but feel H was very hard done by there.

 

[es1]

There's only a question of a foul cos gundogan miscontrols it, hberg tackles where the ball should have been

 

[Ryanj91]

But you referee the game on what actually happened, not what should have happened?

 

[es1]

But you referee the game on what actually happened, not what should have happened?

Exactly, that's why, if anything, it is a foul, as hberg kicks gundogs ankle, imo

 

[RustyRef]

Surprised there is any debate here, it looks a clear penalty for me. Hojbjerg was clumsy and careless and just can't stop once Gundogan changes direction.