davieG Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 Dan's quite right, King was offside and the sending off might have been a bit harsh but we'd have expected the same if one of our players had been pulled down. Blaming the ref is desperate and a bit pathetic. King may have been but it was extremely marginal and therefore is no way the linesman could have legitimately made the decision one way or the other. It was a pure guess.
Finchy Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 King was exactly level. Offside decisions recently have become ridiculously harsh.
Yojoe36 Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 We all know what happened that day (Couldnt find a bigger picture, soz)
DB11 Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 What about the obstruction that Nugent was doing he made no attempt to play the ball and it wasn't in reach of him after Vitor had pushed it away, it was as a result of this that caused Vitor to put his arms around Nugent. In fact what ever happened to the obstruction law I see it taking place all over the pitch and it's never called, is it no longer an offence? It's called impeding the progress of an opponent. IMO, from what I saw, there wasn't any foul play from Nugent. King was exactly level. Offside decisions recently have become ridiculously harsh. How can you say that? You must have seen the replays and King's upper body is leaning forward and is ahead of the defender.
davieG Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 It's called impeding the progress of an opponent. IMO, from what I saw, there wasn't any foul play from Nugent. How can you say that? You must have seen the replays and King's upper body is leaning forward and is ahead of the defender. Well that's exactly what Nugent was doing. Initially he had some control of the ball and it was within his reach but Vitor quite legitimately kicked the ball away from him, Nugent then leant back into Vitor impeding his progress and no longer within touching distance of the ball, it was at this point that under the backward pressure from Nugent that Vitor put his arms around Nugent to resist that illegal blocking and in doing so pulled him, Nugent then as most footballers do these days took advantage of it and started to fall. This is what the referee saw but failed to see the initial blocking by Nugent. I can't remember the last time I saw a ref penalise someone for obstruction it's endemic in the game players regularly impede other players whilst having no realistic reach of the ball many a goal kick or throw in is gained in this way.
dandannieldanok Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 Well that's exactly what Nugent was doing. Initially he had some control of the ball and it was within his reach but Vitor quite legitimately kicked the ball away from him, Nugent then leant back into Vitor impeding his progress and no longer within touching distance of the ball, it was at this point that under the backward pressure from Nugent that Vitor put his arms around Nugent to resist that illegal blocking and in doing so pulled him, Nugent then as most footballers do these days took advantage of it and started to fall. This is what the referee saw but failed to see the initial blocking by Nugent. I can't remember the last time I saw a ref penalise someone for obstruction it's endemic in the game players regularly impede other players whilst having no realistic reach of the ball many a goal kick or throw in is gained in this way. Vitor practically bear-hugged him, how on earth is Nugent the perpetrator . Would you honestly be saying the same if it was at the other end with our striker getting pulled down like that?
davieG Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 Vitor practically bear-hugged him, how on earth is Nugent the perpetrator . Would you honestly be saying the same if it was at the other end with our striker getting pulled down like that? Where did I say he didn't, the obstruction of Vitor was prior to this - try reading what I said if you're going to debate the point.
dandannieldanok Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 Where did I say he didn't, the obstruction of Vitor was prior to this - try reading what I said if you're going to debate the point. But that's rubbish, he's just getting his body in front of Vitor. You may as well pack the game in now if you're going to penalise a player for simply getting his body in front of another player. There is no debate, Nugent didn't commit a foul, Vitor did. Ref made the correct decision.
Father Ted Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 How can you say that? You must have seen the replays and King's upper body is leaning forward and is ahead of the defender. I thought it was just on their feet and imo, his front foot is level.
davieG Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 But that's rubbish, he's just getting his body in front of Vitor. You may as well pack the game in now if you're going to penalise a player for simply getting his body in front of another player. There is no debate, Nugent didn't commit a foul, Vitor did. Ref made the correct decision. It's not a foul to get your body in the way of a player if you have control of the ball Vitor had pushed the ball beyond Nugent's reach therefore no longer had control of the ball that is obstruction, a foul which the ref ignored Vitor then went on to commit his own foul, that's what I saw if you didn't ok but that doesn't mean it didn't happen, sadly refs rarely observe the obstruction law. I'm not going to repeat myself again but I've watched it several times and that is what happened and I'd say the same for whoever committed it as it's not the first time I've observed and commented on the none application of this law.
orangecity23 Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 I was most irritated by Michael Brown's 2 double footed tackles on Abe in the first half. Both dangerous, and if it happened in the Prem to a top 4 team, pundits would have been all over it. Awful tackle, and not even a booking. To rub it in, Oakley was then booked for a much softer tackle minutes later.
lildave3 Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 I really cant see why the **** sent Vítor off... He wasnt impeding a goalscoring oppertunity... Yellow at most. Also, many of his decisions were highly innacurate, yet we cant put the blame completely on the referee... We really didnt help our own cause and, in a way, deserved to lose... Well, he did. Dan's quite right, King was offside and the sending off might have been a bit harsh but we'd have expected the same if one of our players had been pulled down. Blaming the ref is desperate and a bit pathetic. Thankyou! Getting sick of people moaning at every referee we have. Stupid.
Finchy Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 Getting sick of people moaning at every referee we have. Stupid. You're a moron if you don't think we've had some awful refs this season. Having said that, i'd agree that anyone blaming our current plight on refs this season is also a moron.
Matt Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 It's called impeding the progress of an opponent. IMO, from what I saw, there wasn't any foul play from Nugent. How can you say that? You must have seen the replays and King's upper body is leaning forward and is ahead of the defender. How can you say that? Angles my friend, Angles. Might look totally different from another angle, Personally when you account for being level (Something the TV Angle couldn't give) I think you'd have found him level. I struggle to believe you'd disagree with a referee if your life depended on it personally. Coincidental you missed one of the first chances and first fouls of the game? In the penalty area? On King? Which the referee didn't even look at? Bullshit.
DB11 Posted 25 September 2010 Posted 25 September 2010 I thought it was just on their feet and imo, his front foot is level. It's not. It's any part of the players body that can play the ball. Yes their feet are level, but King's upper body isn't. How can you say that? Angles my friend, Angles. Might look totally different from another angle, Personally when you account for being level (Something the TV Angle couldn't give) I think you'd have found him level. I struggle to believe you'd disagree with a referee if your life depended on it personally. Coincidental you missed one of the first chances and first fouls of the game? In the penalty area? On King? Which the referee didn't even look at? Bullshit. The TV angle still shot that I saw was level. I don't agree with the referee for the sake of agreeing, but these refs are at the top for a reason. Most of their decisions are correct, and I can probably empathise with a referee more so than yourself. How is that a coincident? If I wasn't watching the game at that point then I wasn't watching it
Guest ttfn Posted 26 September 2010 Posted 26 September 2010 It's not. It's any part of the players body that can play the ball. Yes their feet are level, but King's upper body isn't. The TV angle still shot that I saw was level. I don't agree with the referee for the sake of agreeing, but these refs are at the top for a reason. Most of their decisions are correct, and I can probably empathise with a referee more so than yourself. How is that a coincident? If I wasn't watching the game at that point then I wasn't watching it Seriously though, have you ever disagreed with a ref? What's your thoughts on the first Liverpool goal yesterday? Fine, I suppose? Vitor did not prevent a CLEAR goalscoring opportunity. Surely there has to be no doubt in that situation. Given that the previous player to touch the ball in that situation was Vitor, Nugent did not have control of the ball. Also, Berner was coming round to cover. Now, I'm not denying that it was a free kick, but that should not have been a red card. I'm not blaming the ref - we were shit. But he got that all wrong.
acooling08 Posted 26 September 2010 Posted 26 September 2010 VIDEO TECHNOLOGY & about respect, I will continue to hurl abuse, objects and whatever at refs who are so shit its unbelievable.
DB11 Posted 26 September 2010 Posted 26 September 2010 Seriously though, have you ever disagreed with a ref? What's your thoughts on the first Liverpool goal yesterday? Fine, I suppose? Vitor did not prevent a CLEAR goalscoring opportunity. Surely there has to be no doubt in that situation. Given that the previous player to touch the ball in that situation was Vitor, Nugent did not have control of the ball. Also, Berner was coming round to cover. Now, I'm not denying that it was a free kick, but that should not have been a red card. I'm not blaming the ref - we were shit. But he got that all wrong. In the laws of the game what was wrong with the Liverpool goal? Was the ball stationary? Yes. Was the ball from the position of the infringement? Yes. Had the referee indicated to restart play (which he doesn't have to do but this leaves no doubt)? Yes. For match control he could have blew the whistle to take the free kick again, and no one would have said anything, but he was certainly not wrong. If Vitor didn't bring Nugent down, who had a clear and unobstructed path to goal from 18 yards away, would Nugent have had an obvious opportunity to score? Of course he would. At the time of the foul Berner was not going to tackle Nugent.
carterfox90 Posted 26 September 2010 Posted 26 September 2010 wqe really have had some shocking refs this season so far surely soon we will get a decent 1 our luick surely is'nt that bad is it or soon someone will be starting a conspirisy thread
Finchy Posted 26 September 2010 Posted 26 September 2010 In the laws of the game what was wrong with the Liverpool goal? Was the ball stationary? Yes. Was the ball from the position of the infringement? Yes. Had the referee indicated to restart play (which he doesn't have to do but this leaves no doubt)? Yes. For match control he could have blew the whistle to take the free kick again, and no one would have said anything, but he was certainly not wrong. This is where common sense comes into play, something referees seem to be lacking in abundance. It was clear to everyone else in the stadium except the ref and maybe Torres that Michael Turner was just giving it back to the keeper to take the free kick. You have to ask yourself why would he try and trick the Liverpool players in that position, there would be absolutely nothing to gain from it.
Kitchandro Posted 26 September 2010 Posted 26 September 2010 And if you're referring to King's disallowed goal and Vitor's red card, then both were correct. Well he was. HAHA! my mate informed me of a bloke on foxes talk who called himself 'the ref' and just defended everything that the ref did even if it was completely wrong! And here you are! Are you here just to wind people up? Seriously? It was clearly not a red card you muppet
philce Posted 27 September 2010 Posted 27 September 2010 King may have been but it was extremely marginal and therefore is no way the linesman could have legitimately made the decision one way or the other. It was a pure guess. I thought they were supposed to favour the attacking team if in doubt? I was just surprised he didnt give a pen when he sent Vitor off, how he could see from where he was that it was a foul never mind a sending off (Berner was covering). He was on the TV, decided to milk it and I bet he's at home now watching it over and over with a big box of Kleenex! They say these thinks even themselves out, looking back I'm not sure, when was the last time we benefited from a dodgy decision like this? Think back to Kisnorbo and the "phantom" pen/sending off? Chopra getting the pen at Cardiff when he was offside, Wittingham moving the free kick 10 yards at the Walkers.,.....
Kitchandro Posted 27 September 2010 Posted 27 September 2010 I thought they were supposed to favour the attacking team if in doubt? I was just surprised he didnt give a pen when he sent Vitor off, how he could see from where he was that it was a foul never mind a sending off (Berner was covering). He was on the TV, decided to milk it and I bet he's at home now watching it over and over with a big box of Kleenex! They say these thinks even themselves out, looking back I'm not sure, when was the last time we benefited from a dodgy decision like this? Think back to Kisnorbo and the "phantom" pen/sending off? Chopra getting the pen at Cardiff when he was offside, Wittingham moving the free kick 10 yards at the Walkers.,..... Also the 3 stone wall penalties we should have had in the 1st leg, and 2 Cardiff players, Chopra being one of them, escaping straight reds for shocking challenges These things never even themselves out for Leicester City
philce Posted 27 September 2010 Posted 27 September 2010 These things never even themselves out for Leicester City They still hold a grudge since we went into admin. Look at Cardiff now? No money but still signing players? How does that work?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.