Jump to content

Jozwiak Disallowed Goal


Jozwiak Disallowed Goal  

296 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I think both decisions together mean Derby have been hard done by. But in my drunken state, I didn’t see a hell of a lot wrong with theirs and I didn’t immediately celebrate Jozwiak’s as I saw Waggy. In hindsight Waggy wasn’t interfering which makes it a kicker. But from the linesman’s view I can see why it was given. 

The biggest shame is that we’ve had to wait to the 7th match to field a decent team. The next 2 matches is what I’d be judging the team on. Harsh maybe but we need 4 points in order for Phil to keep his job. 
 

Not a fan that we’ll stay up because Wycombe, Coventry and Barnsley are in the league. We’re better than relegation candidates. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see why our goal wasn’t given. Waghorn is clearly the last man. The assistant sees him jump and from his angle can only assume he’s avoiding the ball and so interfering.

If you look at the ref’s angle, by the time the shot’s on its way Waghorn will be in the middle of the goal and still moving. The ref doesn’t have freeze frame and will assume interference too.

Really tough on us. I cheered that goal because:

a) We deserved it

b) Jozwiak deserved it

Sadly, I can also see why their goal stood. They may well have thought the ball came off Clarke, which would take offside out of the equation. They missed the foul on Davies. The offside player wasn’t in Marshall’s eyeline given how close Taylor was.

Still feel flat this morning because had we won, the players would have had a real spring in their step ahead of Tuesday. As it is,  the threat of late disappointment will accompany any lead we might get.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately Waggy jumping up was the key moment for me , yes he's offside and the linesman then thinks he's in the gk line of sight.

Look back in time at Jeff Hendricks goal and look were Theo Robinson is and what he does , that goal stood , one of those things , if it had been against us we would have wanted it disallowed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a goal. Keeper has clear line of sight which ref should call not linesman. If we’re going off the linesman’s call then McKenna is stood offside for Taylor’s goal when the ball clearly hits Yates in the face. McKenna isn’t interfering with play but no way can linesman tell that, it looks the same as Waghorn from his angle. And that’s before we even mention Davies having his shirt ripped off his back.

Hughtons justification for the disallowed goal was highly amusing, it would be harsh to allow the goal when an opposing player is stood so far offside - someone needs to inform the offside rule changed about 15 years ago!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do wish he’d just stopped his run a bit earlier though. He was very much stranded in no mans land, he was just sort of dancing around like ‘oo, I seem to be here all on my own’ like a performer who’s walked on stage too early and isn’t sure what to do next. He gave the officials a decision to make, and he didn’t need to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

With Hendrick's goal Robinson is in an off-side position but just standing there (like Arter). Whereas Waghorn is running across the area and jumps over the ball. That's why its disallowed I think. There's no way Samba would have saved it so it's a big slice of luck for them. Waghorn needed to be a bit more 'savvy' I think which is easy to say but difficult to do in the middle of a game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sage said:

But you still insist on automatic promotion form against 2 of the best best 6 teams in the division or you want Cocu sacked.

 

I think injuries or not we shouldn’t have been on 3 points from our opening 6 matches. I’m not a big Cocu fan which is my opinion. Maybe asking for 4 points or bust is wrong/harsh but how many points do you expect against the next 2?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Anag Ram said:

I can see why our goal wasn’t given. Waghorn is clearly the last man. The assistant sees him jump and from his angle can only assume he’s avoiding the ball and so interfering.

If you look at the ref’s angle, by the time the shot’s on its way Waghorn will be in the middle of the goal and still moving. The ref doesn’t have freeze frame and will assume interference too.

Really tough on us. I cheered that goal because:

a) We deserved it

b) Jozwiak deserved it

Sadly, I can also see why their goal stood. They may well have thought the ball came off Clarke, which would take offside out of the equation. They missed the foul on Davies. The offside player wasn’t in Marshall’s eyeline given how close Taylor was.

Still feel flat this morning because had we won, the players would have had a real spring in their step ahead of Tuesday. As it is,  the threat of late disappointment will accompany any lead we might get.

The push on Curtis was the key reason why theirs should have been disallowed, prevented him from challenging for the ball...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.