Am I on my own in thinking we should have had a penalty

Looked a dive to me

 

I thought his heels were possibly clipped. Would have been a dodgy penalty for me, but definitely not worth a yellow.

 

I'd have been livid if it'd been given against us.

I'm more annoyed he didn't stay on his feet. He was in front, and a bloke with that physique wasn't going to be stopped from that position by fair means. By going to ground, he prevented himself having a clear shot at goal, or being hauled down properly by the defender.

Still, he's 20 and learning. Hopefully VI will have a word and we'd get a better outcome if it played again.

 

I thought at first it was a dive. Abit insulting that he got booked for it when their winger ended every single attack with him rolling around on the floor though.

 

To be fair to Daryl, he will have seen the ones given for Swansea and maybe thought the rules were different here.

 

Wasn't a pen would have been annoyed if we had given against us. Booking was strange bearing in mind the Derby player had been going down like he'd been shot every time and once in the box. It's the lack of consistency that baffles me

 

He will have learned more tonight than all his previous games for us put together. His only sniff all game was a chance to shoot and he decided to dive instead. Any slight touch on a defender such as a hand barely touching a back and they went down for the free kick. In situations like that he just has to hold his ground and not give the official a decision to make.

 

Ref rubbish and very one sided. I'll invoke my freakanomics type theory. The more the press listens to high-profile opposition bleating about decisions, the more the officials employ a subconscious bias in avoiding that criticism. I give you Man Utd's penalty ratios during and post Sir Alex. Paradoxically that might work against "Wayne Rooney's Derby" cos it helps paper over the cracks that he can't get the best out of a decent bunch of players and they're scratching around in the basement

 

I said recently all thats missing from our game is a few 'lucky' ref decisions in our favour after seeing a few not given and a few against. I proceed to then see some of the top teams such as Swansea get exactly that. Today was another example where a ref aims to give us nothing other than fouls against, bookings and a balance of decisions more against than for. We really don't need favours though, but neither do the other top teams.

 

No you’re not. Nailed on penalty.

 

poor Dike every time he put his hand on a defenders back, they threw themselves down and got free kick, he walked away smiling shaking his head, gets in box hand in his back, goes down,thinking I will have a bit of this routine, PENNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!, no sorry young un thats a yellow card for you, bet he still sat scratching is head going how does this work then

 

To be fair, you think we should have had a penalty on the days when we're not playing.

 

Sam Parkin said on Quest tonight that he thought the challenge on Dike was a penalty, so you're not alone! I wasn't completely sure, but I thought it probably should have been given. Parkin said he thought Swansea's penalty on Tuesday should not have been given.

 

I thought his feet were clipped, but you couldn't really see them on the replay.

 

George Cain would have given it, even if the balustrade was in someone else's house.

 

I don't think it was a pen, but if the ref is booking him for a dive there, he has to book the Derby winger for a dive 5 minutes earlier. Inconsistent refereeing again.

 

He made the most of it but there was definately a little pull back, the guy on the EFL show agreed, fair result though, neither team did enough the justify the 3 points...

 

You could take your pick from about half a dozen dives by the Derby player. Yet the ref books a Barnsley player at the first opportunity. Once again double standards