| Photo of the non penalty 15:42 - Aug 20 with 8112 views | Illinoisblue |
Enough said. Facking hell
|  |
| |  |
| Photo of the non penalty on 11:22 - Aug 21 with 1669 views | tractorboy1978 |
| Photo of the non penalty on 11:21 - Aug 21 by ronnyd |
That EFL show is a joke, even worse than when it was on Quest. |
There are too many games to cover for it ever to be anything more than it is - unless each league gets its own dedicated show. [Post edited 21 Aug 2022 11:22]
|  | | |
| Photo of the non penalty on 11:31 - Aug 21 with 1633 views | Ryorry |
| Photo of the non penalty on 10:29 - Aug 21 by berkstractorboy |
Not even shown or mentioned on the EFL show unless it was outside the slot for L1 highlights. Certainly not shown with the Town highlights |
Yep,not even mentioned.
Can KM complain, ask for it to be reviewed, anyone know? |  |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 12:04 - Aug 21 with 1600 views | berkstractorboy |
| Photo of the non penalty on 11:21 - Aug 21 by ronnyd |
That EFL show is a joke, even worse than when it was on Quest. |
It is a joke not to show that just allows the shocking officiating to continue and go unnoticed! I mean I saw pens for Pboro and Pompey that were much less it is a joke. Outside the area its a straight red. | | | |
| Photo of the non penalty on 15:30 - Aug 21 with 1544 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Photo of the non penalty on 11:31 - Aug 21 by Ryorry |
Yep,not even mentioned.
Can KM complain, ask for it to be reviewed, anyone know? |
That would be counter-productive. We don't want opposition players banned against our opponents.
It would also be very like Andy Holt. Don't be like Andy Holt. |  |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 15:49 - Aug 21 with 1529 views | Ryorry |
| Photo of the non penalty on 15:30 - Aug 21 by Nthsuffolkblue |
That would be counter-productive. We don't want opposition players banned against our opponents.
It would also be very like Andy Holt. Don't be like Andy Holt. |
Ah, good points (both! haha 😂) [Post edited 21 Aug 2022 15:49]
| |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 16:25 - Aug 21 with 1495 views | SamWhiteUK |
Did anyone watch with the home commentary? I did for the first half. They were gushing over it, saying we'd just witnessed tackle of the season. I assume they only came to that decision after the penalty wasn't given! |  | | |
| Photo of the non penalty on 16:39 - Aug 21 with 1484 views | GeoffSentence |
| Photo of the non penalty on 16:25 - Aug 21 by SamWhiteUK |
Did anyone watch with the home commentary? I did for the first half. They were gushing over it, saying we'd just witnessed tackle of the season. I assume they only came to that decision after the penalty wasn't given! |
If it was tackle of the season the Shrews fans will be disappointed it wasn't shown.
But it wasn't, it was a penalty all day long and much clearer than the penalties that were given in L1 yesterday.
The ban on refs giving Town penalties continues. |  |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 20:30 - Aug 21 with 1362 views | ringwoodblue |
Was defo a pen but KVY’s first touch was appalling and took the ball into the path of the defender. If his control had been better, he would’ve scored anyway |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Photo of the non penalty on 21:35 - Aug 21 with 1307 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Photo of the non penalty on 16:25 - Aug 21 by SamWhiteUK |
Did anyone watch with the home commentary? I did for the first half. They were gushing over it, saying we'd just witnessed tackle of the season. I assume they only came to that decision after the penalty wasn't given! |
They might have a point. It looks like a fantastic recovery tackle in the clip below (watch from 2:20). I suppose there's still an argument about diving in, but it doesn't look anywhere near as bad as the picture in the OP.
|  |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 21:42 - Aug 21 with 1273 views | GeoffSentence |
| Photo of the non penalty on 21:35 - Aug 21 by Swansea_Blue |
They might have a point. It looks like a fantastic recovery tackle in the clip below (watch from 2:20). I suppose there's still an argument about diving in, but it doesn't look anywhere near as bad as the picture in the OP.
|
Doesnt look so bad, but he's still gone through KVY to get the ball. KYY is on his way down before bloke's toe touches the ball. | |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 21:47 - Aug 21 with 1259 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Photo of the non penalty on 21:35 - Aug 21 by Swansea_Blue |
They might have a point. It looks like a fantastic recovery tackle in the clip below (watch from 2:20). I suppose there's still an argument about diving in, but it doesn't look anywhere near as bad as the picture in the OP.
|
I am sorry, that is a dreadful challenge and he wraps his legs around KVY. It is a clear red card. Being in the area it is also a penalty. | |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 00:09 - Aug 22 with 1166 views | jeera |
| Photo of the non penalty on 21:47 - Aug 21 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I am sorry, that is a dreadful challenge and he wraps his legs around KVY. It is a clear red card. Being in the area it is also a penalty. |
Tend to agree.
It's the way he scissors KVY's leg I don't like. That's risking something serious there.
Would hate to see sliding tackles disappear as they're the last ditch defence option that every defender has had to rely on at some point and they look and feel good when they come off. But there also has to be an element of responsibility and that looks close to the mark for me.
If it was the other end I'd have maybe said feck it and made a pack of excuses. I'm not sure. |  |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 00:19 - Aug 22 with 1163 views | Churchman |
| Photo of the non penalty on 21:47 - Aug 21 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I am sorry, that is a dreadful challenge and he wraps his legs around KVY. It is a clear red card. Being in the area it is also a penalty. |
Agreed. That was a ridiculous x rated challenge. Scissors from behind, it was a potential career ender.
Red card and penalty all day long. What the officials were looking at, goodness only knows. |  | | |
| Photo of the non penalty on 08:46 - Aug 22 with 1030 views | DJR |
| Photo of the non penalty on 21:35 - Aug 21 by Swansea_Blue |
They might have a point. It looks like a fantastic recovery tackle in the clip below (watch from 2:20). I suppose there's still an argument about diving in, but it doesn't look anywhere near as bad as the picture in the OP.
|
Agreed. The ref was also pretty close and would have had a similar view. The thing is he could have penalised JJ for a foul in the lead up to the goal, but didn't, so I suppose it's swings and roundabouts. |  | | |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:03 - Aug 22 with 999 views | clive_baker |
It's one of the most ridiculously bad decisions I've seen in ages. I hope the club lay it on thick to the FA and ask for an explanation on that one, regardless of the fact we won. That's not good enough. |  |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:11 - Aug 22 with 988 views | Darth_Koont |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:03 - Aug 22 by clive_baker |
It's one of the most ridiculously bad decisions I've seen in ages. I hope the club lay it on thick to the FA and ask for an explanation on that one, regardless of the fact we won. That's not good enough. |
It was a weird tackle though.
From the side and where the ref and assistant saw it, the defender got to the ball. From behind, it was clear the defender went through KVY so it didn't matter if he got the ball eventually.
It was clearly far too big a decision if the ref only thought the defender might have gone through KVY other than having it confirmed without doubt. |  |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:20 - Aug 22 with 952 views | Plums |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:11 - Aug 22 by Darth_Koont |
It was a weird tackle though.
From the side and where the ref and assistant saw it, the defender got to the ball. From behind, it was clear the defender went through KVY so it didn't matter if he got the ball eventually.
It was clearly far too big a decision if the ref only thought the defender might have gone through KVY other than having it confirmed without doubt. |
I think you’ve nailed it here. It’s a really bad tackle, but the ref sees it once - from a viewpoint that nobody else has. The photo is damning but nobody other than the photographer and those behind the goal has that view of it. Who’d be a referee - thankless task. |  |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:28 - Aug 22 with 932 views | clive_baker |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:11 - Aug 22 by Darth_Koont |
It was a weird tackle though.
From the side and where the ref and assistant saw it, the defender got to the ball. From behind, it was clear the defender went through KVY so it didn't matter if he got the ball eventually.
It was clearly far too big a decision if the ref only thought the defender might have gone through KVY other than having it confirmed without doubt. |
Oh he gets a toe on the ball for sure, but the angle he came through KVY meant he also got a lot of the man. I think if that's anywhere else on the pitch he gives a freekick all day, but bottles it because it was in the box. | |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:29 - Aug 22 with 930 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| Photo of the non penalty on 10:29 - Aug 21 by berkstractorboy |
Not even shown or mentioned on the EFL show unless it was outside the slot for L1 highlights. Certainly not shown with the Town highlights |
It’s almost like it was a League One clash between Shrewsbury and Ipswich which Ipswich won comfortably, so really not relevant in the scheme of things [Post edited 22 Aug 2022 9:29]
|  |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:43 - Aug 22 with 890 views | Darth_Koont |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:28 - Aug 22 by clive_baker |
Oh he gets a toe on the ball for sure, but the angle he came through KVY meant he also got a lot of the man. I think if that's anywhere else on the pitch he gives a freekick all day, but bottles it because it was in the box. |
I’m sure you’re right re: outsider of the box. But from his angle, side on, it still wasn’t anything like as clear as it was seeing it from behind.
On the Town in 5 video Swanners shares, the side-on view suggests the defender might have gone through KVY but what is properly confirmed is the defender eventually gets the ball.
Ref could have got the call right or wrong either way IMO. The bigger question is whether a tackle with both feet off the ground was illegal anyway (out of control and ultimately dangerous) but that seems to be applied very subjectively and almost always when there’s clear illegal contact too. | |
| |
| Photo of the non penalty on 09:53 - Aug 22 with 867 views | itfc48 |
People are being a bit harsh on KVY with the touch. Not easy when running onto a ball on the half volley and he did in fact take the keeper out of the game with that touch. Would have had an easy finish if it wasn't for the defender's mad lunge. | | | |
| Photo of the non penalty on 10:01 - Aug 22 with 856 views | SamWhiteUK |
| Photo of the non penalty on 08:46 - Aug 22 by DJR |
Agreed. The ref was also pretty close and would have had a similar view. The thing is he could have penalised JJ for a foul in the lead up to the goal, but didn't, so I suppose it's swings and roundabouts. |
Having just watched this angle back, its a straight-up pen, no question. Even if you were from the other angle like the ref was, you can tell that the defender has "scissored" KVY's legs (ooh, Matron) from the way KVY goes down | | | |
| Photo of the non penalty on 10:42 - Aug 22 with 804 views | timothyeo |
| Photo of the non penalty on 10:01 - Aug 22 by SamWhiteUK |
Having just watched this angle back, its a straight-up pen, no question. Even if you were from the other angle like the ref was, you can tell that the defender has "scissored" KVY's legs (ooh, Matron) from the way KVY goes down |
Pure incompetence for a ref to not give that. Unforgiveable. | | | |
| Photo of the non penalty on 16:24 - Aug 22 with 676 views | jeera |
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
