> > * I saw one incident where an Italian player WAS being restrained by a
> > NZ player holding his jersey. The Italian responded by doing a most
> > beautiful dive, mechanically quite unjustified by the NZ'ers illegal
> > restraint. He was awarded, as he should have been, a penalty (I think
> > it was)(perhaps THE penalty) but for the wrong reason.

> How do you know it was for the wrong reason? =A0From your description, it=
 was
> a genuine foul and a direct free kick the right call. =A0Unless the refer=
ee
> explicitly explained what the foul was (which I seriously doubt), you can=
't
> know whether the reason for it was what you think was right or not.

You are entirely correct - it was an impression I formed based on what
I felt the ref would have seen from where he stood. That was not even
a conscious decision on my part - just an intuitive one which may well
be wrong. The two players were in the goal mouth and the ref was more
in-field and the NZ player was in close contact behind the Italian and
restraining  him by holding his jersey out of sight (I felt) of the
ref as they together ran for the ball. When it was clear that the ball
was beyond their attention the Italian did a lovely dive and was
rewarded appropriately.

As noted, I have no problem with the award of a penalty or whatever -
just note that it appeared to me to be for the hollywood style and not
the real reason. But, I may be wrong.


                       Russell

-- =

http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist