Quote Originally Posted by World's End Stella View Post
But you accept that 'kick' is a loosely defined term whose interpretation lies entirely within the hands of the referee no matter how incompetent (Dean) or corrupt (Riley) he actually is?

The point here I think is that the foul on Ramsey, or not , depends on how hard he was pushed, and on Hazard on how hard he was actually kicked. The rules provide only a guideline, the rest is down to the ability and impartiality of the referee.

Quite loving the way this has treated that appalling c*ntstain Riley, though. A man (loosely defined as well) I would genuinely like to meet in order to tell him what I think of him followed by, if possible without a criminal charge, a physical assault.
Of course. But he did kick him. The force with which he kicked him open to debate.

Remember the kick Beckham lashed out on Simeone in the WC, hardly one to break a leg, still a kick. Off.

The laws are wrong when coupled with the fact that they are then interpreted as appropriate by individuals. You will get different opinions here, apart from the West Brom pen which universally has been accepted as the wrong decision, so why should we not expect two referees to perhaps judge the same incident differently.

The endless slo-mo and analysis during matches coupled with the equally endless post-match analysis, done largely by bodies which love to encourage a bit of friction and furore, will be the ruination of the game.

The very last people we should listen to, or be influenced by, is managers of either team on the pitch. Wenger was on his feet roaring and complaining about the Bellerin incident, what 50-100 yards away, not sure. Thing is the same manager had been on his feet roaring and complaining about the Maitland Niles incident which was clearly never a penalty.

See also Klopp post Lovren / Everton.