27 Feb 2013

'Out of order' - Lawro blasts 'annoyed' winger for selfish 'antics'. Fair...?

Liverpool legend Mark Lawrenson has chided Swansea City winger Nathan Dyer for his behaviour during the Swans' 5-0 Capital One Cup victory over Bradford City on Sunday.

Dyer winger scored twice against Bradford City in Sunday's final, and in his quest to secure a hatrick, the 25-year-old became embroiled in an embarrassing row with Team-mate Jonathan De Guzman over who would take a penalty awarded in the 59th minute.

De Guzman ended up taking the spot-kick, but Dyer maintains he should've been allowed to take it. He told the Daily Mail:

"There was no designated penalty taker. When you are on two goals and you have the chance of a hat-trick in a final. It’s every boy’s dream and I thought I should have been given it, but I didn’t and I was frustrated and annoyed"

In his column for the Daily Mirror today, Lawro sympathises with Dyer but insists that De Guzman was right to take the penalty:

"Nathan Dyer's penalty antics were out of order. I get the romantic argument that [he] could have completed a hat-trick with Swansea’s spot-kick in the Capital One Cup, and I know that the game was already won, but I’m a bit old school and your penalty taker takes the penalty for me. For all we know, Jonathan De Guzman might have been on a goal bonus"

The ironic thing is De Guzman later scored a second goal, so even if he was on a 'goal bonus', he could've given up the penalty to Dyer and still got paid.

The goal bonus thing is pure speculation, but if that is the reason, I find scoring a goal for money to be far more selfish than another player trying to make footballing history. Commentating on the game, Arsenal legend Alan Smith took Dyer's side. He noted:

"I don't blame him [Dyer, for arguing]. The game's won, and there's a chance for him to make history. De Guzman knows his team-mate's on a hat-trick, and in hindsight, he may feel that he should've acted differently"

I'm definitely on Dyer's side here. The good thing is both players appeared to bury the hatchet very quickly.

Former Liverpool midfielder Jamie Redknapp is a fan of Dyer, and after the Bradford game, he called for the winger to be given England recognition. He enthused:

"We saw them in the white of Swansea City at the home of England yesterday, but isn't it time we took a look at Leon Britton and Nathan Dyer in the white of England? They don't lose the ball and while Dyer was dynamic, Britton is so good on the ball"





NOTE: Please stick to the Comment Policy (Click to read)


17 comments:

  1. Yep, agree with Jaimee: there was no designated penalty taker.  Also de Guzman had just suffered a heavy tackle and there is a school of thought that says the player just fouled shouldn't take the pen.  I hope that Jonathan isn't looking to do a Siggy and use his Swansea form as a loanee to start an auction among other interested clubs at the end of the season.  If that happens, people may change their minds about who the selfish one was.  Overall though it was great day and we need to move on from the penalty saga.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ChampsWinnerTraore11:03 am, February 27, 2013

    Call me a romantic biggest game ever you already on a brace penalty available nice way to put yourself in the history books i dont see the big fuore around it.

    Swansea do not have a designated penalty taker so whats the big deal.

    Lawro as he says is old skl and most lfc fans know how fickle he is and to take his comments with a pinch of salt

    ReplyDelete
  3. There was no designated penalty take, Lawro. Because De Guzman was fouled, it seemed he had first priority. If there was a designated penalty taker, I don't think Dyer would have kicked up as much fuss as he did. Only person at fault for this even being an issue in the first place, is maybe Laudrup. 

    Laudrup said: "That’s the first penalty we have had this season. I forgot to designate someone. I’m sorry, my mistake."

    ReplyDelete
  4. I guess it shows his passion. I think De Guzman was a little selfish, but then again I can understand he wanted to score as well.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It was Swansea first penalty of th season and I sure De Guzman was the allocated penalty taker because he is also the allocated free-kick specialist! I agree with Lawro on the goal bonus issue and there would be good argument for both sides. What matters most is it has been settled and both have a winner medal!  

    ReplyDelete
  6. Interesting subject actually. As a fan you want the team you support to win. Whoever scores does not matter. Selfishness is part and parcel of being a footballer.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Did Lawro lament about how it was Liverpool lifting that trophy last year? We took their manager, they took our trophy.

    In any case, if there was no designated penalty taker, Dyer was within his rights to ask for the ball.

    ReplyDelete
  8. am sure if suarez did what dyer did you would have seen it as disrespecful towards his teammates, the club the fans and everybody else and you have asked or suarez punishment, isnt it jamie? lol

    ReplyDelete
  9. Why is an article about Swansea appearing on this website? If it wasn't Mark Lawrenson who commented on Nathan Dyer would the article be here?

    ReplyDelete
  10. agree m8 who cares but one thing is for sure we did not sign the best player from swansea,and as rodgers was there thats shoking

    ReplyDelete
  11. Suarez took more stick for not taking one last year lol. i dont think whatever suarez does he can win with some people

    ReplyDelete
  12. jaimie dyer had already scored two gerrard had only scored one against swansea and was the penalty taker but he was selfish in your opinion surely dyer is more selfish;-)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Lawro has,nt said a good word about Swansea all season. I noticed he never commented on how well we played like the Sun only on the negatives.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Read it again, fella, their manager has stated that the team had no designated penalty taker.

    ReplyDelete
  15. if i was captain, i would have pulled rank, told both to get out of the way and taken it myself. team first, individual glory second.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I could not have put it better myself :)! Nice one!

    ReplyDelete