It's not that I really expect consistency from Marcelo Balboa, who is doing color commentary on the matches in the Olympics.
However, I am curious, and perhaps someone has an explanation. In the Japan/U.S. match, there was a point where Freddy Adu was clearly pushed (not a bone-jarring shove, but a push all the same) and went down in the box. He didn't get a call, and Balboa praised the ref for not going whistle-happy over what he, "as a defender" considered strong defensive contact, apparently. Balboa contended that Freddy should have tried harder to stay on his feet instead of looking for the penalty call by going down with the contact.
Later on in the match, Maurice Edu pulled at a Japanese attacker's shirt in the box (a brief tug, but a pull all the same). In this case, though, Balboa argued immediately for the penalty call, "for me, that's a penalty" while failing to disclose any distinction between the two cases. The Japanese player, like Adu, didn't look like he was trying to stay on his feet, instead tumbling to make the contact more obvious. To me, it seemed the ref was being fairly consistent (in the Abbe Okulaja I'm-only-calling-a-bone-crunching-tackle-penalty way).
Balboa wasn't as reliable, which left me wondering, other than the obvious push versus pull, what would make one play "a good non-call" and the other "should be a penalty"? Thoughts?