17 Responses

  1. Bishopville Red
    Bishopville Red
    December 20, 2009 at 3:59 pm | | Reply


    It could have been fair play to Mike Dean for applying the letter of the law, but everybody encroached just as much on the awarded penalty as they did on the ones Dean made Chelsea take over. That makes the ref a stupid twat.

  2. MICK WOODLEY
    MICK WOODLEY
    December 20, 2009 at 4:12 pm | | Reply


    MIKE DEAN SUSPENDED IN 2005 FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT[BETTING SYNDICATES],WHY IS HE STLL REFFING IN OUR LEAGUE,AFTER TODAYS PERFORMANCE YOU CAN ONLY THINK HES HAD A BET ON WEST HAM 1-0.

  3. Simon Burke
    Simon Burke
    December 20, 2009 at 4:51 pm | | Reply


    I agree with Bishopville – West Ham encroached on all 3 penalties – in fact many West ham players encroached on all 3 penalties so I think Dean was wrong to do it unless he would have had it retaken had there been a miss which we wont know.

    I think he probably regretted awarding the penalty knowing that he had got it wrong and was hoping Frank would eventually miss.

  4. Peter
    Peter
    December 20, 2009 at 5:17 pm | | Reply


    Mike Dean got it right, although it would have been most interesting to see what he would have done had Lampard missed the third since there were 4 West Ham players 3 yards inside the area.

  5. Tyson
    Tyson
    December 20, 2009 at 5:36 pm | | Reply


    It wasn’t a penalty in the first place Chelsea got extremely lucky today.

    1 win in their last 6 games now I think.. boy are they gonna miss Drogba…

  6. Cantona
    Cantona
    December 20, 2009 at 5:54 pm | | Reply


    stupid refereeing… the west ham players encroached … so they pulled it back 3 times…??? .. uh .. no.. if the west ham players encroach and the penalty is scored.. goal stands.. bad.. bad.. refereeing.. thank goodness frank scored..

    Cantona—

    1. Phil McThomas
      December 20, 2009 at 10:46 pm | | Reply


      There were also Chelsea players for the first two – so that’s a legitimate call, if you insist on doing it right. If there are players from both teams, it could be retaken whether it was scored or missed.

      Unbelievable to see so many Hammers in the box on the third kick. If he had missed it…oh man!

  7. patrick
    patrick
    December 20, 2009 at 6:23 pm | | Reply


    Sorry but I’ll never be objective on this. I loathe CFC, its players, Its ground, its new fans, and its culture. I first visited the Bridge in 1988 and it was near empty, smelled badly and they where in the 2nd division.

    I’m, also West Ham… but I can say Dean had a bad day all round, and both sides have many examples of poor refereeing.

    CFC didn’t expect that sort of West Ham squad today. And its pretty clear that to beat CFC you need to pressure the ball for 90 minutes. The prawn sandwich eaters get all frustrated and get sloppy.

  8. Cy
    Cy
    December 20, 2009 at 6:50 pm | | Reply


    BOTH teams encroached on the first two. When both teams infringe law 14 (penalty kick), it is retaken no matter what the outcome of the kick.

  9. ph0bolus
    ph0bolus
    December 20, 2009 at 6:50 pm | | Reply


    Dean should’ve pulled it back for a fourth if he was following the rule book since players encroached the box on the third pen.

    A dive from Sturridge, but there should of have been a pen anyway from the Gabbidon handball in the first half.

    1. it's all gone pearshaped
      it's all gone pearshaped
      December 20, 2009 at 7:15 pm | | Reply


      Not to mention at least two but maybe three WH players encrouched on their own penalty Diamanti scored!! Why not retake that one then?

      And yeah, how convenient to forget the deliberate handball in the first half!!!!

      1. oliver
        oliver
        December 21, 2009 at 9:39 am | | Reply


        Surely it was a penalty when Green knocked Kalou over as well.

  10. brn442
    brn442
    December 20, 2009 at 7:50 pm | | Reply


    Foul throws are becoming almost the norm, something that should be a scandal in any professional league. Fifa wanted to bring back kick-ins a few years back, maybe they should try again.

    Is it just me or was there an approx 6 second rule on keepers holding on to the ball.

    Perhaps the most annoying trend the last 15 years has been players, especially defenders practically body checking their opposition in a poor guise of “shepherding” the ball out of play, sometimes they’re not even looking at the ball when they’re blocking off the opposing player, I’m surprised refs don’t call obstruction.

    1. The Gaffer
      December 20, 2009 at 9:57 pm | | Reply


      brn442, I agree. Referees should blow the whistle for obstruction a lot more. It’s one of those rules in the book that hardly ever gets called anymore.

      Cheers,
      The Gaffer

      1. Cy
        Cy
        December 20, 2009 at 11:07 pm | | Reply


        Then the refs get slatted for calling a foul thats never called.

        The same way people were complaining about players encroaching and goalkeepers off the line on penalties never being called.

  11. Phil McThomas
    December 20, 2009 at 10:50 pm | | Reply


    Shepherding the ball out of play kills the game the same way that passing the ball back to the goalie used to. If the defender makes no attempt to play the ball, it should be called as obstruction.

  12. jleau
    jleau
    December 21, 2009 at 10:25 am | | Reply


    I’d like to see the refs take more control of the game between the boxes. There is too much fouling without intent to play the ball. I believe that should be a yellow but refs seem content to just award the free kick.

    I’m all for a strong challenge but just kicking someone needs to get the immediate yellow.

Leave a Reply