FA Cup Semi Final Draw

First topic message reminder :

Crystal Palace vs Watford
Everton vs Man Utd or West Ham

I thought that was a free-kick

Wasn't much comtact and he just belly flopped to the ground, kicked his legs out in the classic give away.

Knew he was in a good position to shoot, he's no mug.

Crimey wrote:There's basically no difference. They were both hit, they were both probably happy to take the foul and they both went down.


If anything Payet's looks even worse, as he was going down before the contact, Benteke only went down after - which actually made it look more like a dive, because the contact was with the knee rather than foot.

I have to agree with you there Crimey; Benteke dived AFTER contact whereas Payet dived BEFORE contact, it wasn't a penalty in a million years, there was more contact when he fouled Varela.

Ent wrote:Wasn't much comtact and he just belly flopped to the ground, kicked his legs out in the classic give away.

Knew he was in a good position to shoot, he's no mug.

Like Benteke's penalty decision, it was soft, but I thought it was the right decision.

West Ham vs Watford is on.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Dunno Marky, I guess we saw a different match but there's contact, that's why Webb said it was a pen on tv. And Payet's crime seems to be knowing that he was gonna be hit. Benteke has flopped without needing to, whereas Payet was flying full speed and clipped.

If the ref has good enough eyes to see a dive there then he sees Schwein's best contribution in a red shirt as he takes out Randolph

Both pundits on Sky and Match of the Day all said the Benteke one was a penalty.

Ent wrote:Not the way it works I'm afraid. You should just be happy payet wasn't sent off.

What?

Ent wrote:Refs don't always book people for diving for some reason. One of the more annoying inconsistencies.

He dived to win the free kick he scored so excellently from too.

I'm sorry, but there are at least two fouls on him before he goes down. Jesus I forgot how obstinate you are about your own side

Crimey wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Dunno Marky, I guess we saw a different match but there's contact, that's why Webb said it was a pen on tv. And Payet's crime seems to be knowing that he was gonna be hit. Benteke has flopped without needing to, whereas Payet was flying full speed and clipped.

If the ref has good enough eyes to see a dive there then he sees Schwein's best contribution in a red shirt as he takes out Randolph

Both pundits on Sky and Match of the Day all said the Benteke one was a penalty.

The day Carragher gives an unbiased opinion on Liverpool I'll start trusting you to give one too

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

Crimey wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Dunno Marky, I guess we saw a different match but there's contact, that's why Webb said it was a pen on tv. And Payet's crime seems to be knowing that he was gonna be hit. Benteke has flopped without needing to, whereas Payet was flying full speed and clipped.

If the ref has good enough eyes to see a dive there then he sees Schwein's best contribution in a red shirt as he takes out Randolph

Both pundits on Sky and Match of the Day all said the Benteke one was a penalty.

The day Carragher gives an unbiased opinion on Liverpool I'll start trusting you to give one too

Still leaves all the other pundits that thought it was a penalty.

Pretty sad state of affairs when any pundit or fan tries suggesting either of them were penalties.

Its good to see you so proving my point though, still arguing the angelic nature of a Liverpool player, week or so on.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Pretty sad state of affairs when any pundit or fan tries suggesting either of them were penalties.

Well, I suppose at least Marky has come on completely unbiased and seemed baffled by people saying no.

Hell, all i've done is deflect from a game we were probably better in and where the most contentious decision was the one that kept you still in the tie. But, a draw was probably about right too, we had the better chances but gave away a lot of ground and let Herrera run your game, the thing we should have been trying to stop the most.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Its good to see you so proving my point though, still arguing the angelic nature of a Liverpool player, week or so on.

Just think it's funny that when a similar incident happens with a West Ham player you have changed your tune.

Crimey wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Its good to see you so proving my point though, still arguing the angelic nature of a Liverpool player, week or so on.

Just think it's funny that when a similar incident happens with a West Ham player you have changed your tune.

I actually havent. I have said the same thing repeatedly about diving. My point about the Benteke dive was the fan reaction. This is pointless, I can make genuine points its just ignored cos I dont like Liverpool.

It's ignored Dolph because your view that Payet was fouled is a biased one, it's in no way different to the Benteke situation in fact it's a more blatant dive.

Im not happy he starts going down before, its dumb and also probably the reason he didnt get the penalty. A part of me thinks he didnt deserve it because that, but its not really the rule. Hes touched at speed and fouled (in my opinion) and his decision to start going actually doesnt change that.

However, I think we've got to the stage with fouls like that that if you dont go down you dont get it, so theres also that part of me that doesnt blame him. The difference to Benteke for me is that I just dont think the contact is a foul, and that he goes down not only cos of where he is, but because of where he is and how long is left. Im not outraged by it in any way, its as much cheating as pulling shirts and snide little digs.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's ignored Dolph because your view that Payet was fouled is a biased one, it's in no way different to the Benteke situation in fact it's a more blatant dive.

Its entirely different, and if I'm biased so are you, of course. The foul is very different though, they have no similarities really. Even if you say both are dives then they are entirely different dives. But that is besides the point, my point was ignored by a couple Liverpool fans on the Benteke thing and has been here. I've tried to move on and talk about the game but it seems we're covering cracks

The Payet "penalty" is a classic dive. The dragged left foot is a dead give away. Had Ashley Young done that then he'd have been rightly hauled over the coals.

Probably evens out as the United goal should have been ruled out as well - albeit I'm not sure Schweinsteiger intentionally took out the keeper.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Im not happy he starts going down before, its dumb and also probably the reason he didnt get the penalty. A part of me thinks he didnt deserve it because that, but its not really the rule. Hes touched at speed and fouled (in my opinion) and his decision to start going actually doesnt change that.

However, I think we've got to the stage with fouls like that that if you dont go down you dont get it, so theres also that part of me that doesnt blame him. The difference to Benteke for me is that I just dont think the contact is a foul, and that he goes down not only cos of where he is, but because of where he is and how long is left. Im not outraged by it in any way, its as much cheating as pulling shirts and snide little digs.

Sorry Dolph but the two parts I've highlighted there show why this wasn't a foul, he is already on his way down before the contact is made. As such Rojo won't have actually impeded him, can't really argue that sadly.

Payet just dived.

Benteke gets an obvious touch and went down, unlucky for Delaney as he tries to avoid the contact but he can't and it's a pen.

Born Slippy wrote:The Payet "penalty" is a classic dive. The dragged left foot is a dead give away. Had Ashley Young done that then he'd have been rightly hauled over the coals.

Probably evens out as the United goal should have been ruled out as well - albeit I'm not sure Schweinsteiger intentionally took out the keeper.

He looked like he should have been in a 70's disco doing "The Bump" it was so blatant

PaulHv2 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Im not happy he starts going down before, its dumb and also probably the reason he didnt get the penalty. A part of me thinks he didnt deserve it because that, but its not really the rule. Hes touched at speed and fouled (in my opinion) and his decision to start going actually doesnt change that.

However, I think we've got to the stage with fouls like that that if you dont go down you dont get it, so theres also that part of me that doesnt blame him. The difference to Benteke for me is that I just dont think the contact is a foul, and that he goes down not only cos of where he is, but because of where he is and how long is left. Im not outraged by it in any way, its as much cheating as pulling shirts and snide little digs.

Sorry Dolph but the two parts I've highlighted there show why this wasn't a foul, he is already on his way down before the contact is made. As such Rojo won't have actually impeded him, can't really argue that sadly.

Id love to say that works Paul, but it doesnt. Do what you want, but if you impede someone you impede, regardless of whether they are starting to go or not.

Ent wrote:Payet just dived.

Benteke gets an obvious touch and went down, unlucky for Delaney as he tries to avoid the contact but he can't and it's a pen.

Sorry Ent, not debating Man United with you.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

PaulHv2 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Im not happy he starts going down before, its dumb and also probably the reason he didnt get the penalty. A part of me thinks he didnt deserve it because that, but its not really the rule. Hes touched at speed and fouled (in my opinion) and his decision to start going actually doesnt change that.

However, I think we've got to the stage with fouls like that that if you dont go down you dont get it, so theres also that part of me that doesnt blame him. The difference to Benteke for me is that I just dont think the contact is a foul, and that he goes down not only cos of where he is, but because of where he is and how long is left. Im not outraged by it in any way, its as much cheating as pulling shirts and snide little digs.

Sorry Dolph but the two parts I've highlighted there show why this wasn't a foul, he is already on his way down before the contact is made. As such Rojo won't have actually impeded him, can't really argue that sadly.

Id love to say that works Paul, but it doesnt. Do what you want, but if you impede someone you impede, regardless of whether they are starting to go or not.

The point is though, we don't know if he would have been impeded, because he already started going down.

Crimey wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

PaulHv2 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Im not happy he starts going down before, its dumb and also probably the reason he didnt get the penalty. A part of me thinks he didnt deserve it because that, but its not really the rule. Hes touched at speed and fouled (in my opinion) and his decision to start going actually doesnt change that.

However, I think we've got to the stage with fouls like that that if you dont go down you dont get it, so theres also that part of me that doesnt blame him. The difference to Benteke for me is that I just dont think the contact is a foul, and that he goes down not only cos of where he is, but because of where he is and how long is left. Im not outraged by it in any way, its as much cheating as pulling shirts and snide little digs.

Sorry Dolph but the two parts I've highlighted there show why this wasn't a foul, he is already on his way down before the contact is made. As such Rojo won't have actually impeded him, can't really argue that sadly.

Id love to say that works Paul, but it doesnt. Do what you want, but if you impede someone you impede, regardless of whether they are starting to go or not.

The point is though, we don't know if he would have been impeded, because he already started going down.

Apart from the fact everyone knows he was because Rojo slid in from the side, in Payet's path, and nowhere near the ball.

He wasn't in Payets path at all, in his path to me would suggest he is in front of him which he never actually was, and having looked at it several times again today Payet could have gone on, however it is the easier choice for a player to go down and try and get the penalty.

Can't really argue about the Benteke one last week, and then claim this is a stone wall one.

Marky wrote:

Crimey wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

PaulHv2 wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Im not happy he starts going down before, its dumb and also probably the reason he didnt get the penalty. A part of me thinks he didnt deserve it because that, but its not really the rule. Hes touched at speed and fouled (in my opinion) and his decision to start going actually doesnt change that.

However, I think we've got to the stage with fouls like that that if you dont go down you dont get it, so theres also that part of me that doesnt blame him. The difference to Benteke for me is that I just dont think the contact is a foul, and that he goes down not only cos of where he is, but because of where he is and how long is left. Im not outraged by it in any way, its as much cheating as pulling shirts and snide little digs.

Sorry Dolph but the two parts I've highlighted there show why this wasn't a foul, he is already on his way down before the contact is made. As such Rojo won't have actually impeded him, can't really argue that sadly.

Id love to say that works Paul, but it doesnt. Do what you want, but if you impede someone you impede, regardless of whether they are starting to go or not.

The point is though, we don't know if he would have been impeded, because he already started going down.

Apart from the fact everyone knows he was because Rojo slid in from the side, in Payet's path, and nowhere near the ball.

I don't think it's that definite, Payet had knocked the ball ahead, had he not started going down and continued running he may have been fast enough to avoid the challenge. Had Rojo dematerialised before contact was made, Payet was still going to have fallen down.

Players dont dematerialise though. Thats as pointless as anything you could say.

Paul, they are different "dives" even if they are dives.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Players dont dematerialise though. Thats as pointless as anything you could say.

Paul, they are different "dives" even if they are dives.

My point is that the contact was irrelevant to Payet going down. We can't even be sure that Rojo was going to make contact with Payet if he had continued as normal, because he had already gone down.

Crimey wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Players dont dematerialise though. Thats as pointless as anything you could say.

Paul, they are different "dives" even if they are dives.

My point is that the contact was irrelevant to Payet going down. We can't even be sure that Rojo was going to make contact with Payet if he had continued as normal, because he had already gone down.

If Rojo wasn't there Payet wouldn't have gone down because he'd have been through on goal

Instead Rojo was there sliding in and he fouled him. You're implying Payet would have fallen over without anyone there.

Marky wrote:

Crimey wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Players dont dematerialise though. Thats as pointless as anything you could say.

Paul, they are different "dives" even if they are dives.

My point is that the contact was irrelevant to Payet going down. We can't even be sure that Rojo was going to make contact with Payet if he had continued as normal, because he had already gone down.

If Rojo wasn't there Payet wouldn't have gone down because he'd have been through on goal

Instead Rojo was there sliding in and he fouled him. You're implying Payet would have fallen over without anyone there.

I'm saying Payet saw Rojo coming and went down and instead of continuing running. Lots of players do it, rather than miss the one on one, they earn a penalty. Rojo did make contact, but after Payet started going down, so if Rojo just disappeared before the contact, Payet would have gone down anyway, because he'd already started. Maybe Rojo would have made contact regardless, but we don't know because Payet went down pre-emptively.

To me Payet dived to try and win a pen. Yes he was touched but that was because he dived in the first place. Should have received a second yellow, imo.

He should never have had the first yellow, Lingard waited till he lost the ball to fall over. Ref was dire all game

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:He should never have had the first yellow, Lingard waited till he lost the ball to fall over. Ref was dire all game

Yes, looked harsh.

It's one of many he got wrong on both sides if you ask me Stella. Just seemed to be off the pace the whole game and guessing.

He did have a bad game, though like the penalty claim the decisions he made weren't howlers, and I do have some sympathy for the refs.

Carroll really doesn't fit this West Ham team. He'll probably score again now I've said it, but he's just too static.

Hes useful as an alternate off the bench, but he doesn't really add much from the start.

Carrick lucky not to see red for that block.

Lingard should score. West Ham look shaky at the back. United more comfortable so far

Fellaini challenges Carroll for a header, ends up punching the ball

I agree GSC, he doesn't work the channels and he limits the players who are closer behind.

Been quiet after a good start. Looked nervous.

Should have done better with an early one on one but nothing after that. Antonio seems to have been targeted.

West Ham have had some nice touches and movement but United are fairly comfortable when they get into the final third. As Dolph says, someone needs to run the channels to stretch the defense and create holes to run into.

United threatened sporadically, but looked much more threatening when they did.

1-0 brilliant finish from Rashford. Been coming, West Ham haven't been at the races

Brainless from West Ham repeatedly giving it away in their own half

Looks like Payet had a case for a penalty though

Looks a penalty on replay tbh.

United making some entertaining challenges in their own area

2-0 Fellaini

West Ham have been all over the place at the back all game.

Happy Birthday Dolph!

Man Utd all over them here