| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again 10:41 - Mar 9 with 847 views | Keno |
Can we contact his blind home, sorry EFL, and ask for him to be replaced? |  |
| |  |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 10:43 - Mar 9 with 837 views | _CliveBaker_ |
I don't think they'll give him to us again. |  | | |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 10:58 - Mar 9 with 767 views | FrimleyBlue |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 10:43 - Mar 9 by _CliveBaker_ |
I don't think they'll give him to us again. |
Boro home. Defo info. |  |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 11:06 - Mar 9 with 741 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
I seem to recall us getting that when there was some questioning of an appointed official's potential bias previously (possibly in the League 1 days). |  |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 11:32 - Mar 9 with 708 views | Keno |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 11:06 - Mar 9 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I seem to recall us getting that when there was some questioning of an appointed official's potential bias previously (possibly in the League 1 days). |
Wasn’t when we played Plymouth a ref from Sheffield was replaced | |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 11:49 - Mar 9 with 678 views | EdwardF |
Was the ref corrupt? No.
However, he like so many others, are, quite simply, professional cowards.
They jump on even borderline fouls outside of the penalty area but when it comes to the decisions which can (and do) change games they hide.
We've seen it many times and so do have fans of other clubs.
His excuse of not having seen the blatant foul is pathetic. It's lazy and probably disingenuous. It's merely an attempt to divert attention away from the real reason which is his on-field cowardice. |  |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 11:56 - Mar 9 with 640 views | FrimleyBlue |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 11:49 - Mar 9 by EdwardF |
Was the ref corrupt? No.
However, he like so many others, are, quite simply, professional cowards.
They jump on even borderline fouls outside of the penalty area but when it comes to the decisions which can (and do) change games they hide.
We've seen it many times and so do have fans of other clubs.
His excuse of not having seen the blatant foul is pathetic. It's lazy and probably disingenuous. It's merely an attempt to divert attention away from the real reason which is his on-field cowardice. |
What bugs me is then they don't give penalties but then don't give a yellow for diving. If you don't feel it's a dive then its got to be a pen
That first Azon one, he gives advantage as Azon was fouled initially, but then doesn't give the pen as it was shoulder to shoulder... so in that situation you either bring it back for the foul as we had no advantage or you're deciding it's a pen or a dive... to give a goal kick imo is wrong.
Then the mehmeti one, that's clear as day either a pen or a dive... if you're not giving a pen then book him for a dive. | |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:00 - Mar 9 with 629 views | _CliveBaker_ |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 11:56 - Mar 9 by FrimleyBlue |
What bugs me is then they don't give penalties but then don't give a yellow for diving. If you don't feel it's a dive then its got to be a pen
That first Azon one, he gives advantage as Azon was fouled initially, but then doesn't give the pen as it was shoulder to shoulder... so in that situation you either bring it back for the foul as we had no advantage or you're deciding it's a pen or a dive... to give a goal kick imo is wrong.
Then the mehmeti one, that's clear as day either a pen or a dive... if you're not giving a pen then book him for a dive. |
That's not true is it. Just because an incident isn't a penalty it doesn't mean someone has dived. | | | |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:04 - Mar 9 with 607 views | FrimleyBlue |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:00 - Mar 9 by _CliveBaker_ |
That's not true is it. Just because an incident isn't a penalty it doesn't mean someone has dived. |
Why not? if a defender goesn't play the ball then either the attacker has dived to try and win the pen or the defender has collided with him and not the ball
Think about those pens we've conceded where they've been accidental collisions... not fouls, not dives, but still collisions in the box resulting in pens. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:15 - Mar 9 with 567 views | Guthrum |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:04 - Mar 9 by FrimleyBlue |
Why not? if a defender goesn't play the ball then either the attacker has dived to try and win the pen or the defender has collided with him and not the ball
Think about those pens we've conceded where they've been accidental collisions... not fouls, not dives, but still collisions in the box resulting in pens. |
It is possible for the attacker, under physical pressure, to simply lose their footing and fall, both involuntarily and without foul play by the defender. In which case no blame should beattached to either party.
It's a fine judgement as to when "shoulder-to-shoulder" becomes illegal force or a tangle of legs a trip, also whether a player has willingly thrown themselves down. The grey area in which strikers and defenders operate, pushing the boundaries of the Ref's vision and decisionmaking. |  |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:22 - Mar 9 with 530 views | TractorCam |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 11:32 - Mar 9 by Keno |
Wasn’t when we played Plymouth a ref from Sheffield was replaced |
Charlton. Sam Barrott (now a prem ref) stepped in and we won 6-0, seem to remember that ruffled some feathers from the Owls! [Post edited 9 Mar 12:23]
|  |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:23 - Mar 9 with 516 views | FrimleyBlue |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:15 - Mar 9 by Guthrum |
It is possible for the attacker, under physical pressure, to simply lose their footing and fall, both involuntarily and without foul play by the defender. In which case no blame should beattached to either party.
It's a fine judgement as to when "shoulder-to-shoulder" becomes illegal force or a tangle of legs a trip, also whether a player has willingly thrown themselves down. The grey area in which strikers and defenders operate, pushing the boundaries of the Ref's vision and decisionmaking. |
It is possible for the attacker, under physical pressure, to simply lose their footing and fall, both involuntarily and without foul play by the defender. In which case no blame should beattached to either party.
I do agree, however that does come under the accidental collision, which is still a pen.
Always seen and commented on as soft.. but that accidental collision is still a pen
Unless you mean when theres a dual and the striker literally slips, that i agree is different. But that wasn't the case in the mehmeti situation
The azon one, imo was shoulder to shoulder but also Azon leant into the defender first anyway and just bounced off him lol, we didn't have an advantage though so I feel Busby should have brought that one back for the initial foul
The mehmeti one though is defo a pen, otherwise he's got to book him for a dive. He even waves at him to get up and gives a goal kick [Post edited 9 Mar 12:29]
| |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:24 - Mar 9 with 508 views | _CliveBaker_ |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:04 - Mar 9 by FrimleyBlue |
Why not? if a defender goesn't play the ball then either the attacker has dived to try and win the pen or the defender has collided with him and not the ball
Think about those pens we've conceded where they've been accidental collisions... not fouls, not dives, but still collisions in the box resulting in pens. |
It just isn't true. There's a number of reasons why a player might go down in the box (or anywhere else on the pitch) without it being a dive. Fairly muscled off the ball, lost their footing, stretching to reach a ball, challenging for a ball in the air. Its a contact sport, if a player goes to ground in the box or otherwise it doesn't mean its either a foul or a yellow card for a dive, its a ridiculous statement. | | | |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:32 - Mar 9 with 456 views | FrimleyBlue |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:24 - Mar 9 by _CliveBaker_ |
It just isn't true. There's a number of reasons why a player might go down in the box (or anywhere else on the pitch) without it being a dive. Fairly muscled off the ball, lost their footing, stretching to reach a ball, challenging for a ball in the air. Its a contact sport, if a player goes to ground in the box or otherwise it doesn't mean its either a foul or a yellow card for a dive, its a ridiculous statement. |
Sorry clive it's me not explaining my thoughts property. I get the fairly muscled off the ball thing losing footing etc,
but i was referring to situations like mehmeti's pen. | |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:44 - Mar 9 with 409 views | Guthrum |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:23 - Mar 9 by FrimleyBlue |
It is possible for the attacker, under physical pressure, to simply lose their footing and fall, both involuntarily and without foul play by the defender. In which case no blame should beattached to either party.
I do agree, however that does come under the accidental collision, which is still a pen.
Always seen and commented on as soft.. but that accidental collision is still a pen
Unless you mean when theres a dual and the striker literally slips, that i agree is different. But that wasn't the case in the mehmeti situation
The azon one, imo was shoulder to shoulder but also Azon leant into the defender first anyway and just bounced off him lol, we didn't have an advantage though so I feel Busby should have brought that one back for the initial foul
The mehmeti one though is defo a pen, otherwise he's got to book him for a dive. He even waves at him to get up and gives a goal kick [Post edited 9 Mar 12:29]
|
Yes, a slip by the attacker during an otherwise fair physical contest. I was talking generally, haven't seen the Mehmeti incident yet. | |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 13:08 - Mar 9 with 369 views | stonojnr |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 12:24 - Mar 9 by _CliveBaker_ |
It just isn't true. There's a number of reasons why a player might go down in the box (or anywhere else on the pitch) without it being a dive. Fairly muscled off the ball, lost their footing, stretching to reach a ball, challenging for a ball in the air. Its a contact sport, if a player goes to ground in the box or otherwise it doesn't mean its either a foul or a yellow card for a dive, its a ridiculous statement. |
But when that happens they dont tend to immediately appeal for a penalty do they?
So yes it can not be a foul in those cases so not a pen, but if the attacking player goes down under a challenge, appeals for the pen and 25,000 people look utterly bemused when you award a goal kick instead and you tell him to get up. Either he's dived, which is what Leicester claimed, or its a penalty, there's no 3rd option in play then. |  | | |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 13:29 - Mar 9 with 332 views | _CliveBaker_ |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 13:08 - Mar 9 by stonojnr |
But when that happens they dont tend to immediately appeal for a penalty do they?
So yes it can not be a foul in those cases so not a pen, but if the attacking player goes down under a challenge, appeals for the pen and 25,000 people look utterly bemused when you award a goal kick instead and you tell him to get up. Either he's dived, which is what Leicester claimed, or its a penalty, there's no 3rd option in play then. |
That's not what he said though.
"if a defender doesn't play the ball then either the attacker has dived to try and win the pen or the defender has collided with him and not the ball".
Not every incident is either a foul or a dive. If you're talking about 1 incident specifically then its a different question altogether. | | | |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 13:51 - Mar 9 with 292 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 11:56 - Mar 9 by FrimleyBlue |
What bugs me is then they don't give penalties but then don't give a yellow for diving. If you don't feel it's a dive then its got to be a pen
That first Azon one, he gives advantage as Azon was fouled initially, but then doesn't give the pen as it was shoulder to shoulder... so in that situation you either bring it back for the foul as we had no advantage or you're deciding it's a pen or a dive... to give a goal kick imo is wrong.
Then the mehmeti one, that's clear as day either a pen or a dive... if you're not giving a pen then book him for a dive. |
A non-pen when someone's gone down is not necessarily a dive. |  |
| |
| If that ref from Saturday is selected for us again on 14:15 - Mar 9 with 225 views | VanSaParody |
PGMOL have admitted we should have had 2 penalties v Leicester
So just award us the extra 2 points |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
