• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

*** OMT roosters Vs Magpies ***

Man of the match

  • Total voters
    48
  • Poll closed .
GPRD81 said:
24 hours on and the sense of injustice is palpable. Its something of a perfect storm in this instance as two things have transpired against us - firstly we didn't win a game we objectively and subjectively deserved to win. Stats can mean something and nothing but the sheer number of shots on goal including Xg suggests that only one team should have gained the 3 points.

Secondly the nature of the crucial moment at the end of the game and interpretation of a new handball directive has gone against us - this is the second time in two games we've fallen foul of what nearly everyone is suggesting is an absolute farce of rule. Sadly, yesterday it provided a crucial turning point in the outcome of the game.

I guess we must be philosophical and reflect that it is very unusual that both of these factors work against us. I can only think of the Emirates Marketing Project away game at the start of last season when we really stole a point (2 shots - 2 goals) and they had the ignominy of having a late winning goal chalked off for an equally terrible handball directive (which has now been changed). There will of course be other examples but some days in football the stars are just aligned for you or against you.

It detracts from what was otherwise a largely very pleasing performance that definitely contained evidence of progress being made in terms of attacking play (against a doggedly and organised defensive unit). sure Dier should score the header and 9/10 Kane scores at least one of his 5 chances.

This week is a bit of a mess (and disgrace) in terms of the high volume of games we are playing so may need a few more games to judge whether we are on a upwards trajectory at last . Hopefully the players will be able to take the positives from the game and perhaps even use the siege meteorology to our advantage too.
Click to expand...
That city goal last season would have still been chalked off as his hand changed the direction of the ball to his own man in the same phase of play
 
Bedfordspurs said:
TBF were the only place that isn’t slowing fans back in yet at the top end the stadiums are the best in the world
It’s all about one rule for all as it’s easy...
Click to expand...

I cannot believe anyone cannot see the danger of allowing fans back, forget about the stadiums, think of the people, fans aren't the most sensible people and would not follow guidelines, how do you police it to ensure they do? What about transport in London only 20 people allowed on buses 75% more buses needed to move crowd, social distancing in pubs, restuarants, cafes, monitoring crowd walking to rail and tube stations. Great everyone else I'd allowing it let's forget cases are rising in these countries, it's more important people with so little in their life can watch a pastime event rather the health of anyone else.
 
Mulletperm said:
Can you imagine if we lose out on a Champs League place by 2 points....or by goal difference (after the 'penalty' last week).
Click to expand...
yes. i believe we've been there. done that. several times. e.g. someone denying us CL place by winning a cup/ keeper seems to throw a game/ our guys fall ill altogether
 
parklane1 said:
24 hours on and i am still disgusted with the decisions, VAR is making a mockery of the game and it will only get worse.
Click to expand...
I’m gonna throw a curve ball now
The handball rule were maiming about came in for last season but in the prem we decided not to apply it as we were also starting with VAR... wow
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I’m gonna throw a curve ball now
The handball rule were maiming about came in for last season but in the prem we decided not to apply it as we were also starting with VAR... wow
Click to expand...

All i here from supporters of VAR is excuses ( not saying from you), it will take time, refs have to get used to it, players have to adapt, it will get better, blah, blah, blah, but if anything it is worse now then when it first arrived. Its ruining the game. And when the opposing manager comes out and says its perfection shows that it is not working.
 
parklane1 said:
All i here from supporters of VAR is excuses ( not saying from you), it will take time, refs have to get used to it, players have to adapt, it will get better, blah, blah, blah, but if anything it is worse now then when it first arrived. Its ruining the game. And when the opposing manager comes out and says its perfection shows that it is not working.
Click to expand...
Not sure VAR itself is to blame, for me it's the ridiculous handball rule that VAR helps referee's implement to the letter which leads us to penalty decisions such as Dier's, Ward's and Doherty's, to name but three.

Although agree, without VAR, they couldn't have come up with these crazy handball rules because they would have been impossible to adhere to without the help of video technology
 
treepits said:
Not sure VAR itself is to blame, for me it's the ridiculous handball rule that VAR helps referee's implement to the letter which leads us to penalty decisions such as Dier's, Ward's and Doherty's, to name but three.
Click to expand...

I agree. The officials are applying the rules correctly. The problem is that the handball rule is ridiculous, if the rule hadn't changed, we wouldn't be seeing these decisions.

We either need to go back to the old rule or have different punishments for intentional and unintentional handballs. My preference would be the former.
 
treepits said:
Not sure VAR itself is to blame, for me it's the ridiculous handball rule that VAR helps referee's implement to the letter which leads us to penalty decisions such as Dier's, Ward's and Doherty's, to name but three.

Although agree, without VAR, they couldn't have come up with these crazy handball rules because they would have been impossible to adhere to without the help of video technology
Click to expand...

That is the problem, football has had to change the rules of the games to fit/suit VAR and it is killing the game.
 
milo said:
I agree. The officials are applying the rules correctly. The problem is that the handball rule is ridiculous, if the rule hadn't changed, we wouldn't be seeing these decisions.

We either need to go back to the old rule or have different punishments for intensional and unintentional handballs. My preference would be the former.
Click to expand...
Exactly, I'm so much more livid about the decision than I am that it cost us the win. I was just as angry about the Doherty decision last weekend because you can see the direction football is heading, only that one wasn't so hyped up in the media becuase it didn't alter the result

What's even more baffling is that it's a different rule if you're attacking and you accidentally handle, like Havertz did against WBA. What would have been interesting yesterday is if Caroll had accidentally knocked the ball towards Dier with his hand, rather than his head. My understanding of the current rule is that a pen would still have been given
 
treepits said:
Exactly, I'm so much more livid about the decision than I am that it cost us the win. I was just as angry about the Doherty decision last weekend because you can see the direction football is heading, only that one wasn't so hyped up in the media becuase it didn't alter the result

What's even more baffling is that it's a different rule if you're attacking and you accidentally handle, like Havertz did against WBA. What would have been interesting yesterday is if Caroll had accidentally knocked the ball towards Dier with his hand, rather than his head. My understanding of the current rule is that a pen would still have been given
Click to expand...
No it wouldn’t have as his hand would have inadvertently lead to a goal scoring opportunity within the same phase... I say that on the assumption that the penalty is deemed goal scoring
 
treepits said:
What would have been interesting yesterday is if Caroll had accidentally knocked the ball towards Dier with his hand, rather than his head. My understanding of the current rule is that a pen would still have been given
Click to expand...

I don't think that it would. As with them checking whether Carroll was inside, the earlier offence would have meant they didn't look at the second.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
No it wouldn’t have as his hand would have inadvertently lead to a goal scoring opportunity within the same phase... I say that on the assumption that the penalty is deemed goal scoring
Click to expand...
So I guess the Havertz one is deemed a different phase because the defender had a chance to clear? Still seems ridiculous because if it doesn't hit his hand, it goes out for a goal kick. Depressingly, this rule is here to stay, IFAB won't change it and I don't think the FA have the power to overrule
 
parklane1 said:
That is the problem, football has had to change the rules of the games to fit/suit VAR and it is killing the game.
Click to expand...

The handball rule hasn't been changed to fit VAR. VAR could've officiated the old rule perfectly fine, in fact it would've been easier.

I think that you'd have a point if you were arguing that this handball rule couldn't be officiated without VAR but the error is still changing the handball rule.
 
milo said:
The handball rule hasn't been changed to fit VAR. VAR could've officiated the old rule perfectly fine, in fact it would've been easier.

I think that you'd have a point if you were arguing that this handball rule couldn't be officiated without VAR but the error is still changing the handball rule.
Click to expand...

Split it up whichever way you want it will/is still perfection. I doubt we will ever agree on how good or how bad VAR is though.
 
treepits said:
So I guess the Havertz one is deemed a different phase because the defender had a chance to clear? Still seems ridiculous because if it doesn't hit his hand, it goes out for a goal kick. Depressingly, this rule is here to stay, IFAB won't change it and I don't think the FA have the power to overrule
Click to expand...
Yep
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back