|
Post by lawrieleslie on Aug 21, 2017 7:01:56 GMT
Could we stick to the rules please! Its not the rules that change its the way officials are told to interpret them, they had a good directive and changed it to a bad one that different officials apply differently. As I asked the other day with the directive as it is when does a player become off side? some officials wait for the player to touch the ball whereas others flag the moment he moves toward it. Who is right they can't both be. The rule is specific though regarding when a player is offside and the ref should not wait for the player to touch the ball: A player, in an offside position, is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by: interfering with play interfering with an opponent gaining an advantage by being in that position
|
|
|
Post by alster on Aug 21, 2017 7:20:50 GMT
Its not the rules that change its the way officials are told to interpret them, they had a good directive and changed it to a bad one that different officials apply differently. As I asked the other day with the directive as it is when does a player become off side? some officials wait for the player to touch the ball whereas others flag the moment he moves toward it. Who is right they can't both be. The rule is specific though regarding when a player is offside and the ref should not wait for the player to touch the ball: A player, in an offside position, is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by: interfering with play interfering with an opponent gaining an advantage by being in that position Its all about interpretation and the directives to officials. We've had off side is off side full stop, clear air, now we have a much looser interpretation of what is and isn't involved in active play. The rule has remained constant but the ways of interpreting it and enforcing it are chalk and cheese. Did you notice on Saturday that it appeared one of our players was given offside from an Arsenal throw in, I was a bit confused with how they came to that decision.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 21, 2017 7:26:37 GMT
The first peno shout was the only one I spotted at the game and it was a definite penalty. I loved Jenas saying they should be aggrieved with the offside too because it was tight. Fucking idiot. Jenas has been added to my list of big club arse lickers, what a weapon he was on MOTD, to say the wellbeck one was a penalty as well was just absurd. Ive watched the match back on BT, and Graham 3 yellow cards Poll said he wouldn't have given the first one by Diouf as it happened in real time, I can see his point, Diouf slipped, the ball had already gone to Butland
|
|
|
Post by tqstokie on Aug 21, 2017 7:28:29 GMT
Sometimes you get the luck, rub of the green, benefit of a mistake call it what you like and sometimes you don't it is called football. I think video evidence may clear up the mistakes but in football who calls it and when. I think too much video interference would ruin the game from a spectators point of view and hence I don't think it is a good idea to over use it.
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Aug 21, 2017 7:34:21 GMT
We had some luck. Could have been a different result with another referee. Bad luck happens. Just be glad when it's not your bad luck. Can't disagree with that. For me, we shouldn't underest that the team worked so hard - they almost made their own luck - and did that for the whole 95 minutes. Great to see the absolute joy felt by all this weekend. Spent yesterday in a state of serenity - against the background of playing Pink Floyd's "Comfortably Numb" 👌.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Aug 21, 2017 7:37:24 GMT
The rule is specific though regarding when a player is offside and the ref should not wait for the player to touch the ball: A player, in an offside position, is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by: interfering with play interfering with an opponent gaining an advantage by being in that position Its all about interpretation and the directives to officials. We've had off side is off side full stop, clear air, now we have a much looser interpretation of what is and isn't involved in active play. The rule has remained constant but the ways of interpreting it and enforcing it are chalk and cheese. Did you notice on Saturday that it appeared one of our players was given offside from an Arsenal throw in, I was a bit confused with how they came to that decision. Agree that the interfering with play bit is open to interpretation. As Brian Clough once said "if a player isnt interfering with play then he shouldn't be on the pitch". Or words to that effect.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 7:41:51 GMT
The first peno shout was the only one I spotted at the game and it was a definite penalty. I loved Jenas saying they should be aggrieved with the offside too because it was tight. Fucking idiot. Jenas has been added to my list of big club arse lickers, what a weapon he was on MOTD, to say the wellbeck one was a penalty as well was just absurd. Ive watched the match back on BT, and Graham 3 yellow cards Poll said he wouldn't have given the first one by Diouf as it happened in real time, I can see his point, Diouf slipped, the ball had already gone to Butland Trying to make out the Wellbeck challenge was a penalty was bullshit to be fair, no one appealed or batted an eye lid at the time, yet by showing a freeze frame of Diouf's leg and Wellbeck's appearing to tangle it's suddenly a penalty? I notice they didn't slow the Mustafi challenge on Pieters right down or show a still of that because if they had they would have been talking about an obvious red card. Shite punditry.......
|
|
|
Post by alster on Aug 21, 2017 7:43:03 GMT
Its all about interpretation and the directives to officials. We've had off side is off side full stop, clear air, now we have a much looser interpretation of what is and isn't involved in active play. The rule has remained constant but the ways of interpreting it and enforcing it are chalk and cheese. Did you notice on Saturday that it appeared one of our players was given offside from an Arsenal throw in, I was a bit confused with how they came to that decision. Agree that the interfering with play bit is open to interpretation. As Alec Stock, the old Fulham manager, once said "if a player isnt interfering with play then he shouldn't be on the pitch". Or words to that effect. They really do take the definition to the opposite extreme nowadays I really don't get how you can be a yard away from the keeper in an off side position whilst a teammate shoots from an on side position and not be interfering with play and or an opponent. That player must feature in the goalkeepers decision making.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Aug 21, 2017 7:52:37 GMT
Jenas has been added to my list of big club arse lickers, what a weapon he was on MOTD, to say the wellbeck one was a penalty as well was just absurd. Ive watched the match back on BT, and Graham 3 yellow cards Poll said he wouldn't have given the first one by Diouf as it happened in real time, I can see his point, Diouf slipped, the ball had already gone to Butland Trying to make out the Wellbeck challenge was a penalty was bullshit to be fair, no one appealed or batted an eye lid at the time, yet by showing a freeze frame of Diouf's leg and Wellbeck's appearing to tangle it's suddenly a penalty? I notice they didn't slow the Mustafi challenge on Pieters right down or show a still of that because if they had they would have been talking about an obvious red card. Shite punditry....... Most pundits are just thicko airheads who get paid handsomely for stating the bleedin' obvious or plain making things look what they aren't. Of course we can all just laugh at them but their pontificating and "findings" on motd could lead to retrospective action investigations particularly if they continue to harp on and on like a dimented parrot when it involves the high and righteous clubs.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Aug 21, 2017 8:12:16 GMT
Trying to make out the Wellbeck challenge was a penalty was bullshit to be fair, no one appealed or batted an eye lid at the time, yet by showing a freeze frame of Diouf's leg and Wellbeck's appearing to tangle it's suddenly a penalty? I notice they didn't slow the Mustafi challenge on Pieters right down or show a still of that because if they had they would have been talking about an obvious red card. Shite punditry....... Most pundits are just thicko airheads who get paid handsomely for stating the bleedin' obvious or plain making things look what they aren't. Of course we can all just laugh at them but their pontificating and "findings" on motd could lead to retrospective action investigations particularly if they continue to harp on and on like a dimented parrot when it involves the high and righteous clubs. Can't see anything from the Arsenal game that would be considered for retrospective action Shaq the previous week might have been lucky it was naughty what he did far nastier than what HRK got sent off for for West Brom.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Aug 21, 2017 8:20:13 GMT
Most pundits are just thicko airheads who get paid handsomely for stating the bleedin' obvious or plain making things look what they aren't. Of course we can all just laugh at them but their pontificating and "findings" on motd could lead to retrospective action investigations particularly if they continue to harp on and on like a dimented parrot when it involves the high and righteous clubs. Can't see anything from the Arsenal game that would be considered for retrospective action Shaq the previous week might have been lucky it was naughty what he did far nastier than what HRK got sent off for for West Brom. I was just talking generally. The Mustafi challenge on Eric was probably a yellow but not when the high and mighty players are involved of course.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Aug 21, 2017 8:21:52 GMT
Can't see anything from the Arsenal game that would be considered for retrospective action Shaq the previous week might have been lucky it was naughty what he did far nastier than what HRK got sent off for for West Brom. I was just talking generally. The Mustafi challenge on Eric was probably a yellow but not when the high and mighty players are involved of course. Come on Fletch got away with one too if he was going for the bus he would have missed the next one.
|
|
|
Post by philb on Aug 21, 2017 8:21:57 GMT
Love it when Wenger whinges.
Wasn't moaning when his team cheated and benefited from dodgy refereeing against Leicester last week was he?
What goes around comes around.
Jesé 1 Jessie's 0
Hahahahahahahahaha
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 8:41:34 GMT
I don't get the offside goal debate, surely Lacazette's ankle is part of the player, interfering with play and closer to the goal than the last defender?
Ok would've been unhappy if it was us but that's because I'm a biased prick when it comes to Stoke - but evidence is evidence 😬
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 21, 2017 8:58:51 GMT
The first peno shout was the only one I spotted at the game and it was a definite penalty. I loved Jenas saying they should be aggrieved with the offside too because it was tight. Fucking idiot. Jenas has been added to my list of big club arse lickers, what a weapon he was on MOTD, to say the wellbeck one was a penalty as well was just absurd. Ive watched the match back on BT, and Graham 3 yellow cards Poll said he wouldn't have given the first one by Diouf as it happened in real time, I can see his point, Diouf slipped, the ball had already gone to Butland That's the only peno shout I really saw at the game and I thought we got lucky with it. That Welbeck one though how anyone could see what went with how many people were around him I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by block23 on Aug 21, 2017 9:20:26 GMT
Anyone got a link to the challenge on Eric?
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Aug 21, 2017 9:36:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Aug 21, 2017 9:38:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 21, 2017 9:44:27 GMT
Jenas has been added to my list of big club arse lickers, what a weapon he was on MOTD, to say the wellbeck one was a penalty as well was just absurd. Ive watched the match back on BT, and Graham 3 yellow cards Poll said he wouldn't have given the first one by Diouf as it happened in real time, I can see his point, Diouf slipped, the ball had already gone to Butland That's the only peno shout I really saw at the game and I thought we got lucky with it. That Welbeck one though how anyone could see what went with how many people were around him I don't know. I couldn't see the first one from t'other end of the ground, never saw the other two as penalties when they were near us down that end.
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on Aug 21, 2017 9:50:40 GMT
The foul on Pieters could have been a red card (Cahill's last week was no worse and possibly wasn't as bad) though at that point in the match it was not a game changing moment
Like a number on this post I thought Arsenal had a reasonable shout for two penalties - and they were.
That said the tome of this thread seems to be it's the "rub of the green" when it goes our way - so lets make sure we don't have 10 pages of whingeing and saying that Madley/Mariner/Dean/Atwell (whoever) should never take charge of another game - ever - when it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Aug 21, 2017 9:52:13 GMT
The foul on Pieters could have been a red card (Cahill's last week was no worse and possibly wasn't as bad) though at that point in the match it was not a game changing moment Like a number on this post I thought Arsenal had a reasonable shout for two penalties - and they were. That said the tome of this thread seems to be it's the "rub of the green" when it goes our way - so lets make sure we don't have 10 pages of whingeing and saying that Madley/Mariner/Dean/Atwell (whoever) should never take charge of another game - ever - when it doesn't. You missed Atkinson.
|
|
sjb
Lads'n'Dads
Posts: 60
|
Post by sjb on Aug 21, 2017 11:23:28 GMT
Not sure why some are mentioning the Pieters challenge. While I didn't think it was a red, more relevant is that as far as the chronology of events, it was the least important of the contentious decisions. Any of the penalty calls would have been more important in changing the game due to the fact they came earlier. I'd say you were fortunate on the day, but everyone has their good and bad days with the officiating, so you take it in your stride. It's funny though the fans of just about every team think the refs are against them generally.
|
|
|
Post by philb on Aug 21, 2017 11:25:26 GMT
So from that picture he didn't get the ball and kicked Eric's left foot. That's why the ball moves inside to the edge of the D. Definite foul and Peno then.
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Aug 21, 2017 11:32:02 GMT
I think the 2nd Diouf challenge was a clear penalty its just the defender to his credit stayed on his feet. If he had gone over I think the ref would have given it. Which kinda shows the reason we have this scourge of diving in the game.
The first Diouf challenge is borderline - yes he trips him but the ball had already gone through to Butland so it would have been harsh.
The Wellbeck one is a nothing event.
The goal LOOKED offside in real-time because Pieters stepped up. All these TV replays in slow-mo just prove it was more borderline but still offside. My first reaction during the game, I was looking for an offside call and wasnt surprised when it was given.
But yes overall they should have had at least one penalty from Diouf and maybe two
|
|
|
Post by philb on Aug 21, 2017 11:34:16 GMT
I think the 2nd Diouf challenge was a clear penalty its just the defender to his credit stayed on his feet. If he had gone over I think the ref would have given it. Which kinda shows the reason we have this scourge of diving in the game. The first Diouf challenge is borderline - yes he trips him but the ball had already gone through to Butland so it would have been harsh. The Wellbeck one is a nothing event. The goal LOOKED offside in real-time because Pieters stepped up. All these TV replays in slow-mo just prove it was more borderline but still offside. My first reaction during the game, I was looking for an offside call and wasnt surprised when it was given. But yes overall they should have had at least one penalty from Diouf and maybe two I reckon they should have had one penalty and one to us. So if they're both scored we'd have still won 2-1 😂
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Aug 21, 2017 11:35:10 GMT
I think the 2nd Diouf challenge was a clear penalty its just the defender to his credit stayed on his feet. If he had gone over I think the ref would have given it. Which kinda shows the reason we have this scourge of diving in the game. The first Diouf challenge is borderline - yes he trips him but the ball had already gone through to Butland so it would have been harsh. The Wellbeck one is a nothing event. The goal LOOKED offside in real-time because Pieters stepped up. All these TV replays in slow-mo just prove it was more borderline but still offside. My first reaction during the game, I was looking for an offside call and wasnt surprised when it was given. But yes overall they should have had at least one penalty from Diouf and maybe two I reckon they should have had one penalty and one to us. So if they're both scored we'd have still won 2-1 😂 You mean the Pieters one? It was definitely a foul but clearly outside the box
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Aug 21, 2017 11:40:22 GMT
Jenas has been added to my list of big club arse lickers, what a weapon he was on MOTD, to say the wellbeck one was a penalty as well was just absurd. Ive watched the match back on BT, and Graham 3 yellow cards Poll said he wouldn't have given the first one by Diouf as it happened in real time, I can see his point, Diouf slipped, the ball had already gone to Butland Trying to make out the Wellbeck challenge was a penalty was bullshit to be fair, no one appealed or batted an eye lid at the time, yet by showing a freeze frame of Diouf's leg and Wellbeck's appearing to tangle it's suddenly a penalty? I notice they didn't slow the Mustafi challenge on Pieters right down or show a still of that because if they had they would have been talking about an obvious red card. Shite punditry....... There were two 2 footed challenges made by Arsenal players during the game, none of which have been highlighted in any media outlet that I've seen over the weekend, or were they highlighted or dwelled upon in the BT coverage of the game.
|
|
|
Post by philb on Aug 21, 2017 11:43:16 GMT
The foul on Pieters could have been a red card (Cahill's last week was no worse and possibly wasn't as bad) though at that point in the match it was not a game changing moment Like a number on this post I thought Arsenal had a reasonable shout for two penalties - and they were. That said the tome of this thread seems to be it's the "rub of the green" when it goes our way - so lets make sure we don't have 10 pages of whingeing and saying that Madley/Mariner/Dean/Atwell (whoever) should never take charge of another game - ever - when it doesn't. Like that's going to happen 😂😂😂
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Aug 21, 2017 11:45:25 GMT
Love the irony of Arsene (I didnt see the incident) Wenger suddenly having super cyborg-enhanced eyesight.
Did he get a new pair of glasses during the summer?
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Aug 21, 2017 11:46:19 GMT
The foul on Pieters could have been a red card (Cahill's last week was no worse and possibly wasn't as bad) though at that point in the match it was not a game changing moment Like a number on this post I thought Arsenal had a reasonable shout for two penalties - and they were. That said the tome of this thread seems to be it's the "rub of the green" when it goes our way - so lets make sure we don't have 10 pages of whingeing and saying that Madley/Mariner/Dean/Atwell (whoever) should never take charge of another game - ever - when it doesn't. Well hold on two seconds..... I can't remember the last time there was a game where we had the rub of the green, quite like Saturday. I really can't. I was about to say Swansea when Moses won that Spanish penalty, but then I remember he gave a completely ridiculous one at the other end when Wilfried took a random tumble in the box. Overwhelmingly, we feel the full force of bi-polar refereeing. So many times, I've felt that the referee has been overwhelmingly in favour of the opposition. Alternatively, you get games where the ref hasn't necessarily been bad, but he's perhaps allowed the opposition to get away with time wasting etc. It's rare that I've left a game, like I did Saturday, and thought "wow, we've just absolutely had their pants down, cheers Andre". Very rare in fact. We got the rub of the green. I thought Marriner was genuinely good though and I take back my comments about him being a big team ref. He usually is. Not so on Saturday. He generally handled the game well and didn't buckle when Ox threw his toys out the pram over Ramadan being stronger than him.
|
|