...why did Upson dive in? Sturridge wasn't going to score from there so Upson should surely have stood on his feet. Tackle in the box and you give the officials an opportunity to give the penalty, stay on your feet and the onus is on the opponent to create a better opening than a free shot on goal from 12 yards. We had already won a penalty so the ref was looking to even things up, never mind that he had turned down two legitimate Chelsea penalty claims already! A bad decision by the assistant referee, but an even worse one by Upson!
9 comments:
I fail to understand why it is Upson's fault for making a perfectly legitimate tackle and not the referee's fault! You could say this if his challenge was indeed a penatly. If the referee was seeking an excuse to give penalty to Chelsea it is surely not Upson's fault for making a legitimate tackle.
I'm not saying it was his fault, I'm saying it was a bad decision. If you have a head on car crash because the other driver is on the wrong side of the road, it is not your fault. If you go through the windscreen because you weren't wearing a seat belt, that was a bad decision!
Stay on your feet in the box unless there is absolutly no other choice. Both Cole and Upson went to ground unnecessarily and penalties resulted - doesn't bode well for England's chances in South Africa!
Yes, I know what you are saying but in Cole's case it was a penalty in Upson's case it was not. We could criticize Upson all we want if he did not make contact with the ball, but not when he did. I much prefer criticizing players for making wrong decisions (like giving the ball away) not because they made a good tackle which the referee saw it differently. It is the referee that made a wrong decision not Upson. Equating Cole's tackle to the one made by Upson is totally unfair to our player. But having said all that I understand why you make the point. But there is so many other things we could pick on rather than a legitimate tackle.
Dont you just love football! I see what your point is but at same time it was so blatanlty not a penalty, so in that respect it doesnt matter if he went down or not. It wasent even a 50/50 most people will admit it was never a pen. Even lump-o-lard said so himself on the bbc website. Ok if he hadent of gone in like that the ref wouldnt of had to make that the decsion, but who is to say sturridge wouldnt of run on and kicked the ball into upsons hand or something? Ifs and buts. Ultimately, Upson was right to go in that way as he got the ball, and only the ball, not even a bit of the man, he cant help linesmen that see things very different to most people.
No more the the couple of even more blantant pens we were denied so basically we're still owed but hey that's footy or can I whinge about the ball that didn't cross the line in 66 again
It's a fair analytical point HF but the mindset with which we were playing, chased and harried for everything (not a bad thing), Upson was always going to go in. It was a brilliant tackle though and he cleanly took the ball.
The mistake the referee made was to turn to the linesman who had the wrong plane of view. The ref wouldn't have given it were it not for the linesman.
does your wife take it in the ass? because last time I tried she wouldn't let me
Armchair analysis.
If Upson hadn't done it and they had scored he'd be roasted for backing off - it was a brave tackle - the kind that Ginge put in a lot and we are now bemoaning because no one gets stuck in.
A bad call from the linesman and Matty takes a beating on this blog.
United eh?
Fonzie, how many shots INSIDE the box did Chelsea muster over the 90 minutes? I think two, if you count the three penalties as one. It was a poor decision to dive in because it resulted in the penalty.
Diving in when in your own penalty box is like the saying for putting the opposition in if you win the toss in cricket. "You think about putting them in, then bat anyway." Upson saw the ball and had a rush of blood. In real time, I thought it was a penalty and was yelling "Nooooo!" Had he stayed on his feet, we had plenty of cover to deal with any cross and there is no way Sturridge would have scored from so wide a position.
Ask yourself, if you are old enough to remember him, would Moore have dived in like that in the box? Never in a million years! I bet Clarke has words on Monday and I bet Capello has made a note to have a chat with both Upson and Cole at the next England get together.
I agree it was a fair tackle but so was Noble's at Birmingham that saw him sent off, and Parker's against Arsenal when he saw red. You go to ground and you are in the lap of the gods if your opponent goes sprawling, so in your own box, you stay on your feet unless doing so will CERTAINLY result in a goal scoring opportunity better than a penalty. It is called playing the percentages!
Post a Comment