RotherhamRam Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 How the fook did the dick head Foye give a penalty for a push in the back when the coventry lad was facing him as diving across Shackell who took the ball from the side. We just about edged the first half. It was a bit more open first 10mins and then they found a different gear and get the most ridicilous penalty decision I have seen for a long time. Having said that Coventry kicked on and got the 3pts which for the last 30mins of the game they deserved. Until the penalty decision it could have gone either way but that decision was outrageous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 How the fook did the dick head Foye give a penalty for a push in the back when the coventry lad was facing him as diving across Shackell who took the ball from the side. We just about edged the first half. It was a bit more open first 10mins and then they found a different gear and get the most ridicilous penalty decision I have seen for a long time. Having said that Coventry kicked on and got the 3pts which for the last 30mins of the game they deserved. Until the penalty decision it could have gone either way but that decision was outrageous. I was 100 yards and away and it was such a clearly bad decision from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plusi Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 I thought the decision was for high boot, but it was neither that nor a push. A laughable decision, the sort of penalty you wouldn't even expect Man U to get at Old Truffle. We should have rallied after that though, but gave away another soppy goal and the game was over. Not enough going forward to cause Coventry trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuespachRam Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 I have just watched it..he didnt look like he touched the ball. I think it was a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 while it was a poor decision ( he didn't touch the ball), they were threatening before that and came very close, we got what we deserved today, lets hope we are better than that when we play forest on Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 I thought the decision was for high boot, but it was neither that nor a push. A laughable decision, the sort of penalty you wouldn't even expect Man U to get at Old Truffle. We should have rallied after that though, but gave away another soppy goal and the game was over. Not enough going forward to cause Coventry trouble. Agree. Needed a commons..... Or a cywka? Had Coventry not got the penalty I think it may of gone on to be a bore draw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derbyram1994 Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 I have just watched it..he didnt look like he touched the ball. I think it was a penalty. He did touch the ball, shackells foot took the ball of the player, and their player was starting to fall before shackell touched it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotherhamRam Posted September 10, 2011 Author Share Posted September 10, 2011 For the ones who are saying no than Shackell made no contact on the ball and it was a penalty. Can I ask do you wear glasses if so get them checked if not go. Also if you are saying you have watched the replay I have to question whether you have or just stirring as per usual as you have nothing else to comment on. Shackell clears the ball you can tell by the angle the ball moves. You obviously did not watch the game because the commentators were saying that it was not a penalty. To be honest thought the two who said this would say that becuase they just love to stir things and make outrageous comments. The Coventry lad dives into the challenge trying to get infront of Shackell. Shackell beats him to the ball no way a foul or a penalty. Why is it that people do not post opinions that they honestly believe in but post for reactions. It ruins a perfectyly good forum when this is done. The commentators, the BBC website, Clough and 99.99% apart from the two on here know it was not a penalty. At the end of the day at the end of the game they deserved it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianm Posted September 11, 2011 Share Posted September 11, 2011 I thought the decision was for high boot, but it was neither that nor a push. A laughable decision, the sort of penalty you wouldn't even expect Man U to get at Old Truffle. We should have rallied after that though, but gave away another soppy goal and the game was over. Not enough going forward to cause Coventry trouble. Why bring United into this they actually get less penalties than Chelsea, Liverpool or Arsenal and that goes over 10 years, you read too many papers. It could have been given in the rules as a penalty for dangerous play and in the Champions League it is likely it would have been but never for the reasons Foy indicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted September 11, 2011 Share Posted September 11, 2011 For the ones who are saying no than Shackell made no contact on the ball and it was a penalty. Can I ask do you wear glasses if so get them checked if not go. Also if you are saying you have watched the replay I have to question whether you have or just stirring as per usual as you have nothing else to comment on. Shackell clears the ball you can tell by the angle the ball moves. You obviously did not watch the game because the commentators were saying that it was not a penalty. To be honest thought the two who said this would say that becuase they just love to stir things and make outrageous comments. The Coventry lad dives into the challenge trying to get infront of Shackell. Shackell beats him to the ball no way a foul or a penalty. Why is it that people do not post opinions that they honestly believe in but post for reactions. It ruins a perfectyly good forum when this is done. The commentators, the BBC website, Clough and 99.99% apart from the two on here know it was not a penalty. At the end of the day at the end of the game they deserved it sorry you are wrong, he chests it down and falls over shackell has kicked clean air effectively, made no contact with the ball but it wasn't a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted September 11, 2011 Share Posted September 11, 2011 He did touch the ball, shackells foot took the ball of the player, and their player was starting to fall before shackell touched it agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted September 11, 2011 Share Posted September 11, 2011 sorry you are wrong, he chests it down and falls over shackell has kicked clean air effectively, made no contact with the ball but it wasn't a penalty. How come almost everyone (even the commentators who saw a slow motion replay) say he got the ball? Would find it very strange for the majority to be worng and you be right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derbyram1994 Posted September 11, 2011 Share Posted September 11, 2011 He clearly touched the ball with his boot, the ball went in a different direction when he TOUCHED it too and I don't think the wind did that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derby_Dave Posted September 11, 2011 Share Posted September 11, 2011 sorry you are wrong, he chests it down and falls over shackell has kicked clean air effectively, made no contact with the ball but it wasn't a penalty. Eh I suggest you watch it again. He clearly took the ball! :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plusi Posted September 11, 2011 Share Posted September 11, 2011 I can't believe there is even a debate about this, the ball completely changed direction by about 90 degree's because of Shackell's challenge. Even my mate who is a forest fan said he couldn't believe it was given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I can't believe there is even a debate about this, the ball completely changed direction by about 90 degree's because of Shackell's challenge. Even my mate who is a forest fan said he couldn't believe it was given. Don't think there is even a debate to be had. In my opinion anyone saying he never won the ball either doesn't understand the rules of football or just wants to make 'controversial' comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 What's annoying is, with correct refereeing decisions, we'd have probably drawn the last two games and would have been bothe better off in terms of points, but also morale going into next weeks games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryKrinkle Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Shackell clearly touches the ball, I cannot believe anyone thinks he didn't! Never a pen, but we were **** anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 This may sound against the rules But even is Shackell doesn't touch the ball i still don't think it's a penalty. The contact is minimal. The lad is on the dive already by the time Shackell gets there. It's either a weird diving header or a dive. Not enough contact to give a match winning penalty in a very close game. It's soft. There was nothing in it. Play on. imo. I'd be embarrassed to go home and see myself on telly be knocked over by some bloke blowing on me. Are these grown men rolling around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 thing that pissed me off more than anything else was the speed that the ref gave the penalty - he clearly didn't have a great view (otherwise he'd have seen Shackell touch the ball), yet he didn't consult the linesman who should have been able see everything clearly - we could have pitch completely surrounded by 'assistant' referees - if the pillock in the middle won't ask for their opinion, they are a waste of time...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.