Grumpy Git Posted Sunday at 13:00 Share Posted Sunday at 13:00 15 hours ago, RoyMac5 said: Toss a coin as to which way it goes. I'd settle for them getting no wins and only nine more draws all season. 🤷♂️ Crewton, TigerTedd and RoyMac5 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted Sunday at 15:02 Share Posted Sunday at 15:02 Oh dear me...Stuart Atwell the VAR Ass 😁 in the Wolves Vs Man City game, Last few seconds and City score...1-2, Atwell sends the ref to the screen as he sees a Man City player slightly in front of Wolves keeper, Ref goes to the screen and gives the goal(rightly so imo) Technocrats are ruining the game...imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malagaram Posted Sunday at 15:06 Share Posted Sunday at 15:06 Stuart Atwell at it again,allowing the goal that Man City scored to stand even though a City player was in an offside position and fouling the wolves goal keeper.I can understand the emotion shown by several Wolves players. Atwell should have his licence,if that is what enables him to ref a match,taken from him,and make him serve a long ban for his ineficiency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malagaram Posted Sunday at 15:09 Share Posted Sunday at 15:09 I thought it was Atwell reffing the match Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted Sunday at 15:10 Share Posted Sunday at 15:10 3 minutes ago, Malagaram said: Stuart Atwell at it again,allowing the goal that Man City scored to stand even though a City player was in an offside position and fouling the wolves goal keeper.I can understand the emotion shown by several Wolves players. Atwell should have his licence,if that is what enables him to ref a match,taken from him,and make him serve a long ban for his ineficiency. Nope sorry Malagaram, Atwell sent the ref to VAR as he saw what you saw, Normally when the ref gets sent to VAR it will inevitably end up with VAR winning, On this occasion VAR was ruled to be wrong...in the refs opinion☺️ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malagaram Posted Sunday at 15:14 Share Posted Sunday at 15:14 2 hours ago, Ram-Alf said: Nope sorry Malagaram, Atwell sent the ref to VAR as he saw what you saw, Normally when the ref gets sent to VAR it will inevitably end up with VAR winning, On this occasion VAR was ruled to be wrong...in the refs opinion☺️ Didnt realise that it was Atwell who was the VAR Referee,my apologies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted Sunday at 15:21 Share Posted Sunday at 15:21 Christ Cit-eh games bore me to tears… It’s like watching a funkin metronome LazloW, Ram-a-lama fa fa fa and AndyinLiverpool 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted Sunday at 15:21 Share Posted Sunday at 15:21 5 minutes ago, Malagaram said: Didnt realise that it was Atwell who was the VAR Referee,my apologies My apologies to you too as it would appear the goal was disallowed but Atwell referred the ref to to the screen BBC Report "Stones’ goal was disallowed on-field due to Bernardo Silva being in an offside position and in the goalkeeper’s line of vision. The VAR deemed Bernardo Silva wasn’t in the line of vision and had no impact on the goalkeeper and recommended an on-field review. The referee overturned his original decision and a goal was awarded." Atwell is still a Plonker tho 😁 Malagaram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted Sunday at 15:25 Share Posted Sunday at 15:25 21 minutes ago, Ram-Alf said: Oh dear me...Stuart Atwell the VAR Ass 😁 in the Wolves Vs Man City game, Last few seconds and City score...1-2, Atwell sends the ref to the screen as he sees a Man City player slightly in front of Wolves keeper, Ref goes to the screen and gives the goal(rightly so imo) Technocrats are ruining the game...imo 16 minutes ago, Malagaram said: Stuart Atwell at it again,allowing the goal that Man City scored to stand even though a City player was in an offside position and fouling the wolves goal keeper.I can understand the emotion shown by several Wolves players. Atwell should have his licence,if that is what enables him to ref a match,taken from him,and make him serve a long ban for his ineficiency. One says it should stand, the other disallowed. I think this goes to show how divided some decisions are. Going by VAR, they evidently felt the decision to disallow it was wrong. I think they only overturn decisions that are like 70-30 the other way. Ram-Alf and Malagaram 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustylee Posted Sunday at 15:39 Share Posted Sunday at 15:39 There is no way that the goal was offside. The only way that goal could have been disallowed was for a foul on the keeper. He wasn’t in an offside position when the corner was taken and only became in an offside position at the point Stones touches the ball at which point he wasn’t in the line of the keeper. Carl Sagan, Malagaram and Norman 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malagaram Posted Sunday at 16:22 Share Posted Sunday at 16:22 2 hours ago, Ram-Alf said: My apologies to you too as it would appear the goal was disallowed but Atwell referred the ref to to the screen BBC Report "Stones’ goal was disallowed on-field due to Bernardo Silva being in an offside position and in the goalkeeper’s line of vision. The VAR deemed Bernardo Silva wasn’t in the line of vision and had no impact on the goalkeeper and recommended an on-field review. The referee overturned his original decision and a goal was awarded." Atwell is still a Plonker tho 😁 I could call Atwell a lot worse than you Alf,but its not allowed on here.! Ram-Alf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malagaram Posted Sunday at 16:27 Share Posted Sunday at 16:27 Silva did foul the wolves keeper by backing into him and knocking the wolves keeper to the ground,he got up but was on the wrong foot to make a save,the shot was straight at the keeper,but about 2 feet over his head,am sure he would have saved the shot if he hadnt been pushed over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta Posted Sunday at 17:52 Share Posted Sunday at 17:52 Red_Dawn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Sagan Posted Sunday at 17:55 Share Posted Sunday at 17:55 2 hours ago, rustylee said: There is no way that the goal was offside. The only way that goal could have been disallowed was for a foul on the keeper. He wasn’t in an offside position when the corner was taken and only became in an offside position at the point Stones touches the ball at which point he wasn’t in the line of the keeper. 1 hour ago, Malagaram said: Silva did foul the wolves keeper by backing into him and knocking the wolves keeper to the ground,he got up but was on the wrong foot to make a save,the shot was straight at the keeper,but about 2 feet over his head,am sure he would have saved the shot if he hadnt been pushed over. This is it. It wasn't offside because that only applies once Stones heads the ball forward, but it's a blatant barge on the keeper before this, meaning he was off balance and didn't make the save. It looked as if Atwell was showing the on-field ref the wrong footage, of the offside rather than the barge immediately before. A clear foul. Malagaram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted Sunday at 18:43 Share Posted Sunday at 18:43 46 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said: This is it. It wasn't offside because that only applies once Stones heads the ball forward, but it's a blatant barge on the keeper before this, meaning he was off balance and didn't make the save. It looked as if Atwell was showing the on-field ref the wrong footage, of the offside rather than the barge immediately before. A clear foul. Agreed - and I suspect if it had been Wolves that 'scored' it rather than Man City, it would have been chalked off..... Carl Sagan, Malagaram and Premier ram 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted Sunday at 20:50 Share Posted Sunday at 20:50 If you are going to disallow a goal for barging the GK, you are going to disallow every goal from every set-piece as it happens all the time, and to every player. Rammy03 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Sagan Posted Sunday at 22:25 Share Posted Sunday at 22:25 1 hour ago, Bris Vegas said: If you are going to disallow a goal for barging the GK, you are going to disallow every goal from every set-piece as it happens all the time, and to every player. If you're deliberately barging the keeper it's a foul. If you call it a foul when it happens, it will stop happening and teams will play within the rules. Grumpy Git, Will the Ram and Malagaram 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will the Ram Posted yesterday at 00:14 Share Posted yesterday at 00:14 Jose Sa was clearly fouled seconds before stones scores. I also don’t understand how Southampton didn’t get a penalty for the shirt pull yet Leicester got one that was just as blatant. I think VAR is needed but it’s the inconsistency that makes no sense to me. Two incidents can be near identical but a lot of the time only one is looked at/deemed worthy of a consultation or just completely ignored (eg I think England should’ve had a penalty a the end of the Greece game but nothing was done). IslandExile and Malagaram 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted yesterday at 00:21 Share Posted yesterday at 00:21 1 hour ago, Carl Sagan said: If you're deliberately barging the keeper it's a foul. If you call it a foul when it happens, it will stop happening and teams will play within the rules. So a goalkeeper can clean out everyone in the area but can’t be slightly bumped by an opposing player? Every free kick and corner there is pushing and shoving. You’d be giving out fouls and penalties left, right and center if you penalise that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malagaram Posted yesterday at 09:24 Share Posted yesterday at 09:24 11 hours ago, Bris Vegas said: So a goalkeeper can clean out everyone in the area but can’t be slightly bumped by an opposing player? Every free kick and corner there is pushing and shoving. You’d be giving out fouls and penalties left, right and center if you penalise that. Slightly bumped,he was bloody knocked over! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now