A tough call

Here is another example of how difficult it is to try to interpret a flawed track. Again, it is probably a theropod from the Main Brijun, Pogledalo promontory. If true, the length of the (right pes) print is about 65 cm. The main problem is that many tracks consist of both positive and negative; the concave and convex (in filling) impression. The prominent part (either positive or negative) of the footprint is usually in the distal toes area. Or there's where the deepest part of the impression is situated, if the mud is deep. But quite often it can be a combination: some toe prints have in filling while some don't.  Than there is the displacement rim problem. It can also be negative or positive. The problem of mud collapse, etc...

An excellent paper (pdf file is free to download) on the subject of track identification:

Intra-Trackway Morphological Variations Due to Substrate Consistency: The El Frontal Dinosaur Tracksite (Lower Cretaceous, Spain)