By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Can't agree with the fans blaming the ref, he wasn't too bad against one team (relatively).
Morsy booked for a 50/50? Looked like a red to me.
Annoying from Chappers, what a silly place and situation to try and buy a foul. And Edmundsen... Jesus. Frustrating errors/decisions costing us rather than being under the cosh particularly.
Good game though and fair play to the Pilgrim scorers, cracking strikes. We didn't have our shooting boots on. We will come back fine.
Agree with Blooters re subs. Easy to forget how green KmC is though... he'll be learning from all this (presumably).
I have to say I thought the Morsy booking looked harsh from where I was sitting at the time, just looked like two players colliding as they made a challenge, which I think was how SM saw it from his reaction. I've not actually seen it again and can't find a clip.
Just watched the first goal again and looks a foul on Chaplin to me, is just knocked over as he's getting himself between the player and the ball. Think most refs would have blown up.
3
Phil's report and comments on 10:47 - Sep 26 with 3923 views
Phil's report and comments on 10:41 - Sep 26 by PhilTWTD
I have to say I thought the Morsy booking looked harsh from where I was sitting at the time, just looked like two players colliding as they made a challenge, which I think was how SM saw it from his reaction. I've not actually seen it again and can't find a clip.
Just watched the first goal again and looks a foul on Chaplin to me, is just knocked over as he's getting himself between the player and the ball. Think most refs would have blown up.
While Chaplin should have made more attempt for the ball, imagine if the incident was our defender ploughing through their player, that would have been a stonewall penalty, so how it wasn’t given I will never know
1
Phil's report and comments on 10:48 - Sep 26 with 3907 views
Phil's report and comments on 10:47 - Sep 26 by bluefunk
While Chaplin should have made more attempt for the ball, imagine if the incident was our defender ploughing through their player, that would have been a stonewall penalty, so how it wasn’t given I will never know
Indeed, I really don't see the argument against it being a foul.
1
Phil's report and comments on 10:53 - Sep 26 with 3864 views
Phil's report and comments on 10:55 - Sep 26 by Metal_Hacker
Sorry Phil but it's not a foul - you can see he's looking for it and ran into their player
Of course I'd want the decision but would have been very harsh on them.If it were the other way around we'd be up in arms if it were given
I don't think that's correct, he runs towards the ball, putting himself between the player and the ball as he does so, drawing the foul, perfectly legitimately.
Phil's report and comments on 10:41 - Sep 26 by PhilTWTD
I have to say I thought the Morsy booking looked harsh from where I was sitting at the time, just looked like two players colliding as they made a challenge, which I think was how SM saw it from his reaction. I've not actually seen it again and can't find a clip.
Just watched the first goal again and looks a foul on Chaplin to me, is just knocked over as he's getting himself between the player and the ball. Think most refs would have blown up.
….take off the blue specs and put on the real ones!
I take your point re the first view of the Morsy foul, but on second viewing which VAR would have provided, it was a shocker. He was lucky.
Chaplin couldn’t have been looking for a foul any more if he was holding a placard saying “I’m going to try and make you foul me”. He literally moves away from the direction of the ball and into the Plymouth players path. I’d have booked him for obstruction!
You don’t no nuffink bout football.
"The sooner he comes back the better, this place has been a disaster without him" - TWTD User (July 2025)
….take off the blue specs and put on the real ones!
I take your point re the first view of the Morsy foul, but on second viewing which VAR would have provided, it was a shocker. He was lucky.
Chaplin couldn’t have been looking for a foul any more if he was holding a placard saying “I’m going to try and make you foul me”. He literally moves away from the direction of the ball and into the Plymouth players path. I’d have booked him for obstruction!
You don’t no nuffink bout football.
I'll have to take your word on Morsy as I've not seen it again, but re Chaplin, he moves towards the ball and into the player's path, drawing the foul. Quite legitimate to put yourself between yourself and an opponent when battling for a loose ball in that manner. Free-kick Town, no goal!
I'll have to take your word on Morsy as I've not seen it again, but re Chaplin, he moves towards the ball and into the player's path, drawing the foul. Quite legitimate to put yourself between yourself and an opponent when battling for a loose ball in that manner. Free-kick Town, no goal!
….indirect free kick.
Whatever happened to indirect free kicks in the box?!
"The sooner he comes back the better, this place has been a disaster without him" - TWTD User (July 2025)
0
Phil's report and comments on 11:10 - Sep 26 with 3583 views
I'll have to take your word on Morsy as I've not seen it again, but re Chaplin, he moves towards the ball and into the player's path, drawing the foul. Quite legitimate to put yourself between yourself and an opponent when battling for a loose ball in that manner. Free-kick Town, no goal!
Morsy's challenge was without a doubt a red, if VAR was involved, he would have walked.
Whatever happened to indirect free kicks in the box?!
I think to obstruct you have to deliberately impede the opponent, which I'm not sure is the same as putting yourself in between as you look to get on a loose ball ahead of him, although I can see what you mean.
Whatever happened to indirect free kicks in the box?!
The offence ‘obstruction’ was removed from Fifa’s Laws of the Game in 1997 and was replaced with “impeding the progress of an opponent.” ‘Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.’ The penalty for impeding remains an indirect free-kick. So why do we never see one given?
Phil's report and comments on 10:55 - Sep 26 by Metal_Hacker
Sorry Phil but it's not a foul - you can see he's looking for it and ran into their player
Of course I'd want the decision but would have been very harsh on them.If it were the other way around we'd be up in arms if it were given
In most games I don’t think it’s a foul but the fact that the referee spent a large part of the game giving even more innocuous ones than this, and giving them almost exclusively to Plymouth, means that we once again fall victim to the inconsistency of incompetent referees.
0
Particularly when… on 11:25 - Sep 26 with 3407 views
The offence ‘obstruction’ was removed from Fifa’s Laws of the Game in 1997 and was replaced with “impeding the progress of an opponent.” ‘Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.’ The penalty for impeding remains an indirect free-kick. So why do we never see one given?
…we constantly see defenders shielding the ball from attackers as it dribbles off for a goal kick.
It’s a foul anywhere else on the pitch.
I hate football.
"The sooner he comes back the better, this place has been a disaster without him" - TWTD User (July 2025)
1
You Portsmouth fans are…. on 11:27 - Sep 26 with 3394 views
That Morsy tackle was at least a yellow. If League 1 had VAR then he might have been in trouble. There was a good camera angle of it and it wasn't pretty...
Say what you want about the Chaplin one, but when even your own fans are divisive about the decision, then there is something in the referee not giving a foul. I thought it was a foul at the time, then on second viewing, not so sure. If he goes to clear it and gets clattered, I think he gets the foul. I think it's naïve defending. Just get rid.
2
Phil's report and comments on 12:00 - Sep 26 with 3198 views
Phil's report and comments on 10:41 - Sep 26 by PhilTWTD
I have to say I thought the Morsy booking looked harsh from where I was sitting at the time, just looked like two players colliding as they made a challenge, which I think was how SM saw it from his reaction. I've not actually seen it again and can't find a clip.
Just watched the first goal again and looks a foul on Chaplin to me, is just knocked over as he's getting himself between the player and the ball. Think most refs would have blown up.
Nah Hammers. Chappers runs into him and falls over trying to buy one. It's ridiculous. Not like you to be so biased man.
Phil's report and comments on 12:01 - Sep 26 by Dyland
Nah Hammers. Chappers runs into him and falls over trying to buy one. It's ridiculous. Not like you to be so biased man.
Not biased, I'd see the incident the same the other way around. No doubt part of his motivation in rnning across the Plymouth player was to draw a foul but that's part of the game.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
