BBC Sport pundit Dion Dublin has seriously questioned whether Tottenham left back Danny Rose was completely honest in his actions when winning his side a penalty against Huddersfield on Saturday.
Having seen Harry Kane net from open play in the first half, the Spurs defender burst forward into the Terriers’ box only to go down under a challenge from Florent Hadergjonaj, with referee Craig Pawson pointing to the spot and the England man converting for his second of the day.
Speaking about the incident, Dublin insisted that it was a “weak penalty” and that Rose had made the most of it, questioning whether there was really enough contact to make him hit the deck and force Pawson’s hand.
He told BBC Final Score: “I would say it was a weak penalty decision, without a doubt, Danny’s made the best of it, without a doubt.
“There is contact – enough to make him go down? Possibly not. But he’s made the referee make a decision.”
Opinion
This might well be one of those incidents which is debated for days and days as fans and pundits fail to agree on whether it was a penalty or not. The fact there was contact probably will sway things in Rose’s favour but as Dublin asks, was there really enough to make him fall over and earn his side the penalty? He could have even stayed on his feet and taken the shot on himself, but it goes to show that the defender would rather have the clear cut opportunity of a penalty, which he of course would not have to take, than being blamed for missing an opportunity from open play. Would the use of VAR have turned this one over? That is where the technology does not really help, for again it is all up to the referee to decide whether there was enough contact to warrant a penalty. The fact that pundits are debating it even with a number of replays at their disposal shows this was a contentious decision.