Nope... sorry but this has nothing to do with Henry. If that was how Neill fouled Grosso, I would be the first to say that was a foul.
The man who
fouled him admitted that he did foul him and no argument about the penalty. The coach of Portugal agreed that it was a penalty. What more did you want to hear??? It's like ignoring a plead from a murderer when he admitted that he killed a person.
Anyway, my mates who are die-hard fans of Man Utd even says it was a foul and he couldn't understand why SBS commentators calls it a "controversial" penalty. It is only "controversial" because they say so.
If you watch the replay properly, Henry had shifted most of his weight on the right of his body, as he was turning onto the right. A clearly stuck out leg hit his and knocked his balance in procedure. You may think it is the slightest touch but how about you try and get into the position Henry was, one leg in the air and I'll have a wild kick at your other leg that is holding your weight and we'll see how good your balance would be after that. Anyway, were you expecting a broken leg or shin tackle for it to be called a penalty???
You say Grosso dived because Neil had no part of interference of the ball but yet this one has and you still call that not a foul? Contradiction?? Perhaps if that was Viduka who was fouled, you'd be jumping up and down to cheer him on.
If you're just a fan that only followed the World Cup because Australia was participating, please sweeten' up & stick with AFL..