By Walter Broeckx
I didn’t intend to talk about this any further. But as the comments are divided I thought it was time to try to bring some clarity to this incident.
There are roughly speaking two versions. One is saying (in simple terms): Mulumbu played the ball first and then made contact with Wilshere and thus it is no foul.
The other version is: Mulumby went through Wilshere and then made contact with the ball so it is a foul.
What better way to resolve this matter with the pictures? We can all use hundreds of words to describe an incident. But the pictures are what they are. I have taken these pictures from the games as they were shown on Arsenal player. Let us do the pictures do the talking then.
So the first picture I will show is taken from behind the goal.
You see the ball is at least one meter away from Wilshere and in the circle you can see that Mulumbu is diving in at Wilshere and is catching the right leg of Wilshere. His standing leg. The leg he needs to balance himself to take the shot he had in mind. This picture clearly shows that Mulumbu hit Wilshere first.
In fact this should be enough to settle the argument. But for those who are not that easily satisfied I will show even more pictures.
Now this is the picture where Mulumbu makes contact with the ball. And you notice that he has both his legs clamped around the standing leg (by now Wilshere has no longer a leg to stand on one could say). But clamping your leg around an opponent his leg is always a dangerous tackle. It can tear ligaments, it can break bones. It just is dangerous.
Now you might say that this camera angle might be deceiving. So lets have a look from behind then. The refs view one could say.
Again you see the ball coming in from the right and a distance of at least one meter between Wilshere and the ball. And again in the circle you see how Mulumbu is clearly making impact with the standing leg of Wilshere clamping both his legs around the standing leg of Wilshere. And again I point at the fact that the ball was not with Wilshere and so Mulumbu clearly first played the man and then only made contact with the ball.
Coming in from behind, going through the player, first bringing down the player and then making contact with the ball.
Anyone still doubting is I fear someone who doesn’t want to see what is there. Or he is from bad will. Or has an agenda.
If you notice the position of the ref it really is unbelievable that he didn’t do what he should have done: call the foul.
As far as I know all media outside England were unanimous in saying that this was as clear as a penalty can be. The only other version is the English version. Saying this was a tackle within the laws. So are there different rules in England? If so then the FA should notify FIFA and tell them that they play football outside the FIFA laws of the games. And thus the FA is no longer part of football as it is played in the rest of the world.
And as I said in an earlier article the fact that the media is very selective in showing different penalty incidents is somewhat strange. They wanted to declare the Koscielny-Long incident as a stonewall penalty but on the other hand refused to show images of the only stonewall penalty decision the ref had to give: the foul on Wilshere from Mulumbu.
“Che coincidenza, sembra che la TV italiana da 10 anni fa” * as an Italian fan would say.
Forgive me for any wrong translation but Italian is not a language I am really familiar with. But I think it goes like this….
* What a coincidence, it looks like the Italian TV 10 years ago.