| Dids 10:13 - Aug 20 with 4901 views | Wickets |
I wonder if he watched our first goal on here 'cos as you can see from the pictures he was busy appealing for a pen when it was scored. Also for those at the South stand end did the Defenders stop? thinking it must be a pen as i can't really see how the ball gets through to Waggy? |  | | |  |
| Dids on 10:16 - Aug 20 with 4854 views | Pendejo |
There's a well worn phrase that is relevant here... Play to the whistle. Clear penalty, but if there's no whistle then the ball is in play.
Johnhoz is bravely going into refereeing this season maybe he can give us his POV |  |
| |
| Dids on 14:35 - Aug 20 with 4654 views | Scuzzer |
| Dids on 10:16 - Aug 20 by Pendejo |
There's a well worn phrase that is relevant here... Play to the whistle. Clear penalty, but if there's no whistle then the ball is in play.
Johnhoz is bravely going into refereeing this season maybe he can give us his POV |
Who played the ball through to Waggy? He looked well offside. |  |
| |
| Dids on 14:39 - Aug 20 with 4634 views | 3_5_2 |
Everyone around us stopped, appealing for the penalty. We were all debating if is was / wasn't and there there was a roar. I thought it was because the ref had given it, then realised we had scored
Mass confusion but in a good way |  |
| |
| Dids on 14:42 - Aug 20 with 4613 views | poppiesman |
Looked a clear penalty, although the ref can be seen waving away the appeals, which if we hadn't had scored would had been an awful decision.
Think the ball came off the defender through to Waghorn, hence onside. Although hard to tell as the goalposts are out of line.lol |  | | |
| Dids on 14:48 - Aug 20 with 4582 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Dids on 14:42 - Aug 20 by poppiesman |
Looked a clear penalty, although the ref can be seen waving away the appeals, which if we hadn't had scored would had been an awful decision.
Think the ball came off the defender through to Waghorn, hence onside. Although hard to tell as the goalposts are out of line.lol |
Think they are also tapered as they look narrower atthe top. From SBR, the goal posts at the far end look shorter. |  |
| |
| Dids on 14:53 - Aug 20 with 4555 views | GeoffSentence |
I dont think it would have been a penalty. Looked to me like the shove was just outside the area.
And we never get penalties, |  |
| |
| Dids on 14:58 - Aug 20 with 4530 views | LankHenners |
Wasn't in the south stand but it looked like everyone stopped for half a second, except Waghorn of course who took advantage of the momentary standstill. Looked like one defender might have blocked him off legally (i.e. he touched the ball, which was what spun it out to Waghorn), whilst another shoved him in the back. |  |
| |
| Dids on 15:37 - Aug 20 with 4419 views | Bluearmy71 |
I didn't see Waghorn put the ball in the net as I too was looking at the ref to see if a penalty was gonna be given.
Just the way it goes sometimes! |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Dids on 15:45 - Aug 20 with 4384 views | KilburnBlue |
| Dids on 14:42 - Aug 20 by poppiesman |
Looked a clear penalty, although the ref can be seen waving away the appeals, which if we hadn't had scored would had been an awful decision.
Think the ball came off the defender through to Waghorn, hence onside. Although hard to tell as the goalposts are out of line.lol |
The challenge was just outside the box to me but seen them given...Just not to us |  |
| |
| Dids on 15:55 - Aug 20 with 4343 views | MedwayTractor |
| Dids on 15:45 - Aug 20 by KilburnBlue |
The challenge was just outside the box to me but seen them given...Just not to us |
Just had another look at the highlights, you are correct - the push is in the semi-circle, so a direct free kick (maybe even indirect, for obstruction), certainly not a penalty.
As McGoldrick goes down, the ball rolls forward & is touched on by the Brentford defender, At this point, Waghorn is level with the last defender, so onside. It doesn't matter, therefore, whether he is on an onside position or offside position when the ball reaches him.
Good refereeing to allow play to go on, although the action was so quick that the ref might not have had time to blow for the foul anyway, before the ball was in the net. |  |
| |
| Dids on 17:02 - Aug 20 with 4212 views | Wickets |
| Dids on 15:55 - Aug 20 by MedwayTractor |
Just had another look at the highlights, you are correct - the push is in the semi-circle, so a direct free kick (maybe even indirect, for obstruction), certainly not a penalty.
As McGoldrick goes down, the ball rolls forward & is touched on by the Brentford defender, At this point, Waghorn is level with the last defender, so onside. It doesn't matter, therefore, whether he is on an onside position or offside position when the ball reaches him.
Good refereeing to allow play to go on, although the action was so quick that the ref might not have had time to blow for the foul anyway, before the ball was in the net. |
It looked to me as though he did wave away the appeals as someone has said, just glad we scored as it was just outside the box. | | | |
| Dids on 17:06 - Aug 20 with 4193 views | Terra_Farma |
| Dids on 10:16 - Aug 20 by Pendejo |
There's a well worn phrase that is relevant here... Play to the whistle. Clear penalty, but if there's no whistle then the ball is in play.
Johnhoz is bravely going into refereeing this season maybe he can give us his POV |
Spot on regarding the whistle.
Regarding the "foul", it was fractionally outside the box.
Another 3 points on the board. Happy days. | | | |
| Dids on 17:25 - Aug 20 with 4137 views | jaykay |
i was in the sir alf and saw everything clearly. the tackle or foul was right on the the penalty area,the push or tackle pushed didz right onto the penalty spot. the ref waved his arms as no penalty or freekick as he thought the defender won the ball. then waghorn could not be offside. there players thought it was a foul as they stopped playing. |  |
| forensic experts say footers and spruces fingerprints were not found at the scene after the weekends rows |
| |
| Dids on 18:57 - Aug 20 with 3947 views | Bluearmy71 |
| Dids on 15:45 - Aug 20 by KilburnBlue |
The challenge was just outside the box to me but seen them given...Just not to us |
Yep, initial challenge outside the box, couldn't see it from The North Stand but on TV it was clear enough, great advantage played by the ref. | | | |
| Dids on 19:01 - Aug 20 with 3933 views | poppiesman |
| Dids on 18:57 - Aug 20 by Bluearmy71 |
Yep, initial challenge outside the box, couldn't see it from The North Stand but on TV it was clear enough, great advantage played by the ref. |
But he didn't play the advantage, as he is clearly seen waving away appeals for the foul. | | | |
| Dids on 19:06 - Aug 20 with 3906 views | Dolly2.0 |
| Dids on 15:37 - Aug 20 by Bluearmy71 |
I didn't see Waghorn put the ball in the net as I too was looking at the ref to see if a penalty was gonna be given.
Just the way it goes sometimes! |
I was this also.
Neither goal was properly celebrated by me because of unsuredness. |  |
| |
| Dids on 19:10 - Aug 20 with 3891 views | Bluearmy71 |
| Dids on 19:01 - Aug 20 by poppiesman |
But he didn't play the advantage, as he is clearly seen waving away appeals for the foul. |
I believe Brenner on BBC Suffolk said he'd played the advantage, I just assumed that some form of free kick was gonna be given and when it wasn't that advantage had been played.
Are you sure he wasn't waving appeals for a pen away and let the advantage go? I mean surely had Didz dived a kick to them would have been given? Or did the ref see it as a natural coming together and so allowed play to continue? | | | |
| Dids on 00:45 - Aug 21 with 3635 views | britbiker |
| Dids on 15:45 - Aug 20 by KilburnBlue |
The challenge was just outside the box to me but seen them given...Just not to us |
And therefore accorroding to Rimmers Brace both goals should be disallowed and thus we really only drew. But still doesn't provide adequate explanation how the four Villa goals against his team didn't count either |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
