guest3338
|
|
« Reply #60 on: November 20, 2021, 16:19:33 pm » |
|
Smudger reckoned the first challenge second half woukd have been a nailed on red in the nineties.
|
|
|
|
BackOfTheNet
|
|
« Reply #61 on: November 20, 2021, 16:19:50 pm » |
|
An away point is a good point, but it sounds like the ref had one to forget.
|
The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
|
|
|
west stand oap
|
|
« Reply #62 on: November 20, 2021, 17:27:04 pm » |
|
Having started the thread about referees I purposely did not mention todays in my pre-match comments. The pompous Carl Boyeson has been around for many a season and I cannot remember him having a good game whenever we have had him. I think most of us would have been happy with a point before kick off and but for a defensive slip it could have been 3. Other than Pinnock's fine goal we did not trouble O'Donnell much and I thought it odd that he did not come out to narrow the angle for the goal. We now need to get back to winning games with 2 home games next week against KC's Oldham and free scoring Harry's Leyton Orient. Oldham did us a favour by beating Port Vale today but a comment from one of their fans said he would have been disappointed with a draw as Oldham were the worst team they have played this season.
|
|
|
|
Manwork04
|
|
« Reply #63 on: November 20, 2021, 17:44:02 pm » |
|
That I think was one of the most inept refereeing “performances” I’ve ever seen! 3 nailed on red cards.
|
Rule Britannia
|
|
|
Bingers
|
|
« Reply #64 on: November 20, 2021, 17:48:25 pm » |
|
Boy Bingers' football coach tells me that they have had that ref at City before and he has been consistently crap. So they don't like him either.
|
The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2015
|
|
|
EB Claret
|
|
« Reply #65 on: November 20, 2021, 18:47:43 pm » |
|
Just watched the highlights on the Sky Sports web site and was thrilled to see us score the only goal of the game, 3 points! thanks Sky
|
|
|
|
WadeyCobbler
|
|
« Reply #66 on: November 20, 2021, 22:23:22 pm » |
|
I enjoyed the trip up North, absorbing game despite few clear cut chances. Terrible officiating. Bradford could/should have had red cards for the elbow on Etete, the two foot off the floor lunge on Rose, the stamp on Lewis' foot and the late swipe on Roberts head.
|
|
|
|
Dan
|
|
« Reply #67 on: November 20, 2021, 22:26:16 pm » |
|
|
The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2013
|
|
|
guest49
|
|
« Reply #68 on: November 20, 2021, 23:20:16 pm » |
|
Makes you wonder what the ref thought he saw. He had a pretty clear view. Indefensible.
|
|
|
|
1971cobbler
|
|
« Reply #69 on: November 21, 2021, 08:35:57 am » |
|
Not that it helps us in any way, but is retrospective action from TV footage a thing in the EFL?
|
|
|
|
Bigbadcob
Newbie
Offline
Posts: 10
Badges: (View All)
|
|
« Reply #70 on: November 21, 2021, 09:34:59 am » |
|
Not that it helps us in any way, but is retrospective action from TV footage a thing in the EFL?
If they did issue retrospective red cards, then there would have to be at least 3 (if not four) of them which surely would deem the result void. Would mean Bradford having to reply yet another game in a week! My son is a grass routes referee so have learned to try and appreciate that officials see things differently, but the TV evidence Is pretty compelling and clarifies what we saw from the stands. I hate saying it … but VAR would stop all this thuggery.. but dread the day it happens at our level. It should not be too difficult for one of the 4 officials to spot the assaults!
|
|
|
|
guest49
|
|
« Reply #71 on: November 21, 2021, 11:00:47 am » |
|
The Etete one (the defender knew exactly where he was before swinging his arm towards his head) and Rose should have seen red. Not sure on the Lewis one. You know it’s a poor ref when Deepcut keeps quiet. It’s fair to say he had a bit of a stinker.
|
|
|
|
Deepcut Cobbler
|
|
« Reply #72 on: November 21, 2021, 11:04:09 am » |
|
The Etete one (the defender knew exactly where he was before swinging his arm towards his head) and Rose should have seen red. Not sure on the Lewis one. You know it’s a poor ref when Deepcut keeps quiet. It’s fair to say he had a bit of a stinker. And you know that that isn't true...
|
“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old: Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn. At the going down of the sun and in the morning We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon
The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
|
|
|
guest49
|
|
« Reply #73 on: November 21, 2021, 11:11:19 am » |
|
And you know that that isn't true... As our resident ‘Pete Walton’ what did you make of them DC?
|
|
|
|
CobblerForever
|
|
« Reply #74 on: November 21, 2021, 13:29:03 pm » |
|
Regarding the officiating;
The fact that Quest have covered the issue specific to our game would suggest a serious problem in this case. The evidence provided is damning.
|
|
|
|
Carton Lid
|
|
« Reply #75 on: November 21, 2021, 13:41:13 pm » |
|
Regarding the officiating;
The fact that Quest have covered the issue specific to our game would suggest a serious problem in this case. The evidence provided is damning.
I don't think that Quest showed the guy leaving his foot in on Roberts, which I thought was the worst of the lot, he could have avoided Roberts completely but chose not too.
|
|
|
|
Deepcut Cobbler
|
|
« Reply #76 on: November 22, 2021, 12:03:55 pm » |
|
As our resident ‘Pete Walton’ what did you make of them DC?
In my opinion and interpretation of the Officials thinking based on being there, seeing it live and a number of TV broadcasts: The Elbow: I didn't see it, I'm sure that the officials didn't either because the TV footage and the 'damage' to ET was pretty conclusive, however whether it was intentional or not is debatable so it probably should have been a yellow border line red? What surprised me was the fact that the official didn't stop the game earlier for treatment of a head injury? The Two Footer: Saw this, but from a distance but was still surprised that there wasn't any sort of sanction (FK/Card), but assumed that it must have been different to what we had seen from our angle. Plus, I didn't see JB react, aside from spreading his arms which is normally an indication. Having seen the footage, it ticked all of the boxes for a red card offence; SERIOUS FOUL PLAY A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play. I assume that the Referee overruled the 4th Official and/or the AR in not awarding anything? The Stamp: Saw this but thought that our player had been stood on accidentally, after seeing the footage, it could and probably should have been a caution. The Liam Roberts Challenge: Saw this, could have been a yellow or a red depending on how the Referee saw it. The reaction from our players normally gives an indication but teams are quite good at getting opposition players sent off by doing that. I believe that his first thought was yellow but when he went across to the AR, I thought that he was going to up it to red, he didn't so he must have been convinced that it was 'only' a reckless challenge for the ball. Unfortunately, that's all we have because there isn't any footage.
|
“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old: Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn. At the going down of the sun and in the morning We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon
The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
|
|
|
Carton Lid
|
|
« Reply #77 on: November 22, 2021, 13:03:40 pm » |
|
The Liam Roberts Challenge: Saw this, could have been a yellow or a red depending on how the Referee saw it. The reaction from our players normally gives an indication but teams are quite good at getting opposition players sent off by doing that. I believe that his first thought was yellow but when he went across to the AR, I thought that he was going to up it to red, he didn't so he must have been convinced that it was 'only' a reckless challenge for the ball. Unfortunately, that's all we have because there isn't any footage.
If you go on ifollow on the official site, the extended highlights show it. Wasn't there but from the hightlights , I thought he left his foot in on Roberts deliberately and think that was the worst of the lot, he could have easily pulled out but didn't
|
|
|
|
guest3338
|
|
« Reply #78 on: November 22, 2021, 15:07:08 pm » |
|
In my opinion and interpretation of the Officials thinking based on being there, seeing it live and a number of TV broadcasts: The Elbow: I didn't see it, I'm sure that the officials didn't either because the TV footage and the 'damage' to ET was pretty conclusive, however whether it was intentional or not is debatable so it probably should have been a yellow border line red? What surprised me was the fact that the official didn't stop the game earlier for treatment of a head injury? The Two Footer: Saw this, but from a distance but was still surprised that there wasn't any sort of sanction (FK/Card), but assumed that it must have been different to what we had seen from our angle. Plus, I didn't see JB react, aside from spreading his arms which is normally an indication. Having seen the footage, it ticked all of the boxes for a red card offence; SERIOUS FOUL PLAY A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play. I assume that the Referee overruled the 4th Official and/or the AR in not awarding anything? The Stamp: Saw this but thought that our player had been stood on accidentally, after seeing the footage, it could and probably should have been a caution. The Liam Roberts Challenge: Saw this, could have been a yellow or a red depending on how the Referee saw it. The reaction from our players normally gives an indication but teams are quite good at getting opposition players sent off by doing that. I believe that his first thought was yellow but when he went across to the AR, I thought that he was going to up it to red, he didn't so he must have been convinced that it was 'only' a reckless challenge for the ball. Unfortunately, that's all we have because there isn't any footage.
From those highlights. The Elbow:Not sure there was intent to harm, but he did catch him. The Two Footer:Martin Smith was right in his commentary...that would have been a nailed on red in the nineties. Re ref not seeing it? Look where he was. May not have seen the impact but if that was so would surely have seen the lunge? Challenge on Roberts: Just a cowardly act from a twat of a player. Should have been a red. I also thought the Bradford player did nothing to avoid Roberts after he had come charging off his line in the first half after a good through ball. Excellent piece of goalkeeping again. What stamp?!
|
|
|
|
guest49
|
|
« Reply #79 on: November 22, 2021, 15:27:45 pm » |
|
From those highlights.
Challenge on Roberts: Just a cowardly act from a twat of a player. Should have been a red. I also thought the Bradford player did nothing to avoid Roberts after he had come charging off his line in the first half after a good through ball. Excellent piece of goalkeeping again. What stamp?!
Cowardly is exactly the right term. He can clearly tell from 2 yards that Roberts is winning the race and just makes no effort to redivert his run. Not the most malicious foot in but deserved a red for the audacity of making contact with his boot and someone's head when it should have been easily avoided. He knew what he was doing. Tw*t.
|
|
|
|
|