THE most intriguing part of Brian Laws’ assessment of the penalty that decided Sunday’s derby was not the headline-grabbing assertion that Martin Olsson had ‘conned’ the referee, but that no blame should be attached to the player.

It is a view far from unique to the dignified Laws, since this is football’s logic.

When Thierry Henry handled the ball to take France to the World Cup, in the most blatant flouting of the spirit of the game since Stephen Ireland’s Superman underpants, Damien Duff told us in one breath that he felt ‘cheated’ and in the next that Henry was blameless and the striker’s reputation remained intact.

To football people, engulfed in the growing ‘win at all costs’ mantra, this apparently makes perfect sense.

The blame lies not at the door of the man who knowingly deceived, but of the referee who made an honest mistake.

Olsson – a down-to-earth and generally decent chap – was superb on Sunday, but it is he who must take most of the responsibility for the game’s most controversial moment.

If there was any debate at the time about whether telling contact was made, and this journalist feels it appropriate to give referees the benefit of the doubt in such circumstances, there could be none after a thorough inspection of television replays.

True, Brian Jensen’s leg did connect, but since Olsson was already horizontal at the time it hardly counted.

Whichever side of the East Lancashire divide you sit on, there can be no excusing Olsson’s unassisted fall to earth.

There should be no question of a retrospective ban, as Eduardo so nearly received earlier in the season, since a yellow was the worst Olsson could have got at the time.

But nor should he escape the blame that referees so readily receive.