Two things disturbed me going into the game against the Hammers. The first was that Mike Dean was to be appointed the referee and the second was that Sky had selected the fixture to be shown live. Each, in isolation, would not have been a cause for concern, but together they spelt controversy with a capital C in much the same way as birds of a feather stick together, or Graham Poll and a mirror go together. In short, at a time when most referees don’t go looking for trouble, some actually seek it out, shake their head despairingly at it, and enjoy every moment in the spotlight of wrong-righting it, whatever they perceive ‘it’ to be.

On Sunday ‘it’ was the rights and wrongs of penalty taking and poor old Frank found himself in the wrong place at the wrong time, whilst in the company of the leading wrong-righting referee of this or any other [televised live] Match of the Day. Indeed, time was of the essence on this occasion because encroachment during penalty-taking was Mike Dean’s chosen specialist subject for this particular MotD and, as everyone knows, players ‘runs’ into the box during the procedure have to be executed to perfection to be deemed legal. Of course, if the layman didn’t know this before Sunday’s game he can certainly highlight the distinction between legal and illegal encroachment now that Mike Deans Road Show on Refereeing Tricky Situations of Your Own Making begins another tour of the capital and the difference between the two is crystal clear. I am much the wiser, certainly, and just itching to use it all as an excuse to air my new-found knowledge, so here’s a few wrinkles I’ve picked up from the [car] crash of a course he delivered…

1. The encroachment rule should not be applied to the first penalty awarded in any match if that penalty is in favour of the home team.

That’s pretty much self-evident from Mike Dean’s exemplary application of the law yesterday, but, that said, I’m still not sure what happens if the penalty is missed when encroachment has taken place. Is that merely a grey area, or is it a loophole that, perish the thought, is often ignored by a referee altogether as he looks for an easy life?

2. Once a second penalty has been awarded [to the away team] a referee can bring the encroachment rule into play should such a breach occur. Illegal encroachment is deemed to have occurred if players from either side enter the box [or the ‘D‘] before the kick has been taken, thereby gaining an unfair advantage should the penalty be saved and the ball remain in open play.

Excuse the pun, but spot-on again by Mike, because at least half a dozen West Ham players flew in there like rats up a drainpipe. Oh, nearly forgot, Didier also made a token effort from the ‘D’, purely as an afterthought.

3. In circumstance where the [second] penalty has been awarded [to the away team] and encroachment has taken place, the penalty must always be re-taken, even though the away team might have converted it and not been responsible for most of the encroachment that has taken place.

Despite the fact that a blur of claret and blue entering the box signalled who the real culprits were, full marks to the ref once more - he knows the letter of his law alright, and when it’s best to apply it - retake the penalty, Frank old son!

4. In circumstances where the retake of the first penalty awarded, being a second penalty awarded to the away team (hope you are still with me on this) ends with another illegal encroachment, the retaken penalty must be retaken again, even though the away team may have converted it and an almost identical amount of team membership, encroachment-wise, has taken place.

Getting complicated now, but Mike kept his head when all around [except Frank, of course] were, I kid you not, still losing theirs and many of them were dashing lemming-like into that penalty area. I swear even more Hammers were giving it a go this time (well you would, wouldn’t you?!) and, sad to say, Didier failed his exam paper by trotting in from the ‘D’ yet again. Jamie Redknapp spotted him this time - “Look at Drogba! Doesn’t he know he can’t use the ’D’? †he fumed, studiously ignoring the clutter of claret and blue already wending their way past the penalty spot in search of a half-made save to lump in a stand.

5. Where the previous rule has been flouted for a second time [third penalty in all about to be taken, of second penalty awarded, to away team] the referee should now give consideration to the issue of yellow cards, as there is clear evidence of continual infringement of the law, except in those cases where the perpetual offenders are home team players who have already received cautions and are, therefore, in danger of being sent off for a second yellow card for merely taking the mickey out of a pedantic official who has got himself into a right old mess. Should the perpetual offender be an away team player he should be booked immediately, but only if this does not make the referee look even more of a muppet as a result of having ignored umpteen other players, in different shirts, committing the same offence.

Got to hand it to Mike Dean here, as he followed his own guidelines implicitly, giving free rein to the Hammer hoards muscling in on the action for, what turned out to be, one last time. No further cards for any of them, or Didier, who simply couldn’t be arse’D’ anymore. Or Frank for that matter, who showed that he knew the rules better than anybody - not rocket science, just keep sticking those pens away and eventually the referee, even if it is Mike Dean, will have to stop making a complete fool of himself in front of a mass audience and award the goal.

Spot-on post. Great stuff.

It was a joke the way he called that situation and cant disagree with anything here. There were at least three spammers in the box on their penalty and there wasnt even the hint that he was going to call it back.

As Dorset puts it, he is looking for the easiest way out. The lack of consistency is shocking, and you can bet that if this had happened to Arsenal or Man Utd, you can bet it wouldnt just be forgotten

It was a joke the way he called that situation and cant disagree with anything here. There were at least three spammers in the box on their penalty and there wasnt even the hint that he was going to call it back.

As Dorset puts it, he is looking for the easiest way out. The lack of consistency is shocking, and you can bet that if this had happened to Arsenal or Man Utd, you can bet it wouldnt just be forgotten

Sorry Westway, but I saw the footage on MOTD, and I think Franco was the only one potentially encroaching and he was a matter of inches inside the D.

Sorry Westway, but I saw the footage on MOTD, and I think Franco was the only one potentially encroaching and he was a matter of inches inside the D.

The same observation was made by Chelsea TV last night, RBJ, but that was not really the point I was trying to make regarding the first penalty. Minor encroachment or not, I think that Mike Dean was never going to make an issue out of any infringement on a penalty taken by the home side, especially if it could end up being to their detriment. Of course, there is no evidence to support this view, but there is no denying that Premiership referees do need to restore some official control during the penalty-taking situation, because it’s been sadly lacking this season, and it soon became obvious in this game that Mike Dean felt he was the man for the job.

Ideally, his remedial work would have been best suited to a situation where the goalkeeper didn’t stay on his line and then it could have been produced as evidence that referees ARE actually trying to clamp down on that particular problem rather than ignoring it and letting a lot of recent ‘saved’ penalties stand, regardless of this infringement currently occurring on a regular basis. Dermot Gallagher was also on Chelsea TV last night and said as much himself, naturally enough backing Dean every step of the way in the process.

In effect, this ’perfect’ situation never arose [Green stayed religiously on his line] and the referee was gifted the second prize of a cavalry charge into the box instead. The rest is history, but imagine the home crowd furore after the second retake had it been West Ham’s penalty and you can see why I doubt that Mike Dean was ever going to be as pedantic with them as he was with Frank’s triple effort. Personally, I believe Frank behaved impeccably and so did the rest of the team under what was becoming severe provocation.

On this highlighted occasion, for that is what Dean made of it, the referee was either very fortunate in his choice of team [and therefore, vicariously, its penalty taker] to feed through the wringer, or he was deliberately carrying the whole exercise too far to exert maximum publicity from a high profile away side being stretched to the limit of its patience. Decide for yourself, but whilst you are doing so bear in mind, as Westway said, how others would have reacted. To my mind, for the referee’s point to be made as he wished, in the absence of yellow cards for persistent encroachment, he needed a level of compliance he hardly deserved to be able to rely on.

Edited December 22, 200916 yr by Dorset

Between the award of the penalty and it actually being taken, I'm sure he's had a word in his ear-piece saying he'd made a mistake! Getting us to re-take until we miss was his idea of poetic justice I suppose, but he hadn't taken into account that Lamp's was taking the penalty/ies - Well done Frank!!

I won't even go into their keepers foul on Kalou, that the SKY commentators saw more as a 'coming together' than a foul! I'm sorry but if you knock the ball pass the keeper and he takes you out it's a penalty! Weither he's going away from goal, with it's in the goal mouth or the edge of the box, contact with a player who has just knocked it past you is a foul, anywhere on the pitch!!!

*Had to laugh at the Chelsea fans who started singing 3-1 when he scored the one that mattered!!

The same observation was made by Chelsea TV last night, RBJ, but that was not really the point I was trying to make regarding the first penalty. Minor encroachment or not, I think that Mike Dean was never going to make an issue out of any infringement on a penalty taken by the home side, especially if it could end up being to their detriment. Of course, there is no evidence to support this view, but there is no denying that Premiership referees do need to restore some official control during the penalty-taking situation, because it’s been sadly lacking this season, and it soon became obvious in this game that Mike Dean felt he was the man for the job.

Fair enough, Dorset. I seem to recall Mike Dean being a very notorious homer anyway, and the Spammers game proved that.

Great post, however :lol:

I thought it was a curious way to enforce the rule. I suppose he technically got it right in the end (although he probably should have ordered a third retake because Drogba encroached on the last attempt, although Dean couldn't see it). It was just kind of crazy. Only the second time ever in the Premiership a penalty had been taken three times.. I hate to see referees selectively enforce the rules. If they are going to order every penalty where this happens retaken for the rest of the season, then so be it: let's enforce the rules as they are written. But we all know that isn't going to happen.

I must say our lack of discipline is alarming. How do our players encroach again after the first retake is awarded. Not to even mention Drogba on the third attempt. Where is the discipline? And where were all these players running into the box when Lampard missed the penalty against City?