Pundit launches accusation against Harry Kane following penalty incident

2
Image: SpursWeb

Tottenham failed to fashion enough clear cut chances against Newcastle United despite dominating possession and having a considerable territorial advantage.

Despite the introductions of Christian Eriksen and Giovani Lo Celso in the second half, Mauricio Pochettino’s men still found it difficult to play their way through the Magpies’ parked bus.

However, there was one moment in the second half when Lo Celso played Kane through on goal and Newcastle defender Jamaal Lascelles hurled himself in Kane’s path bringing the striker down.

While the England captain is insistent that it was a penalty (Daily Mail), former Liverpool forward Stan Collymore is convinced that Mike Dean got the decision 100% correct.

In his column for The Daily Mirror, Collymore wrote: “Some geezer tweeted me and said Kane had been rugby tackled, which was utter nonsense.

“Yes, Lascelles was trying to get to the ball, he ham-fistedly put an arm out and there was a bit of contact, but contact in itself doesn’t mean penalty.

“Kane had slowed down looking for the foul, he leaned in looking for the contact and went down far too easily.”

The 48-year-old said he is very much supportive of the fact that the referees are setting a precedent to stop players going down easily and said he was delighted that both Kane’s appeal, as well as David Silva’s appeal against Bournemouth, were turned down.

Collymore wrote: “I’ve played football at every level, from Sunday league to international, and like many of you who turn out I know it’s not easy to knock someone off the ball if they really don’t want to be knocked off it.

“Recently, the slightest of touches has had players going down as if they’ve been shot.

“So to see two of the highest-profile players in our game, David Silva and Harry Kane, having appeals turned down was flabbergasting and brilliant.

“And those decisions have left me convinced the powers-that-be have decided it’s time to push back.”

Spurs Web Opinion

Collymore certainly has a point when he says that players do go down too easily these days and it is about time the referees tried to cut it out. However, as far as the Kane incident is concerned, Lascelles is making no attempt to get the ball and is just trying his best to obstruct Kane after losing his balance. So while Kane might have gone down a bt dramatically, there is no question it was a foul.

Have something to tell us about this article?

2 COMMENTS

  1. Has anyone ever cared what Stan Collymore thinks about anything. He is nothing more than a washed up ex pro who has had to go to the Far East, where presumably there are unaware of his history, to make a living as a pundit, he makes controversial statements with the aim of gaining an audience in the U.K.

  2. Stan Collymore, you are just another pundit looking for brownie points.
    Surely, you have played the game. A push is a push, an obstruction is obstruction. On obstruction,
    Lascelles actually dove and obstructed Kane, fell onto Kane’s left leg which made him fall.
    What game where you watching? Hello! It seems, Spurs players have to be seriously injured to receive a penalty award.
    Case in point?! Salah for Liverpool, running in the box, slight pull on shirt, Salah still running with the ball away from opponent could have maybe with his talent still might have scored? What did he do? He stopped, no one on him, he looks at the ref, Ref points to the spot to make it a little easier for him. No evidence of him being obstructed from advantage.
    So you see my friend, and as I see it, Spurs do not look for the perks as the other big five are awarded. Shame on you and the refs.
    Have another bias day! You hater of Spurs.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.