Sparkz 76 Posted October 14, 2017 Report Share Posted October 14, 2017 I watched the game last night and I didn’t really see disallowed goal now seeing this is an absolute joke but I did see Burton players feigning head injuries all bloody night Aden Flint even picked one off the floor and told him to get on with the game Poor showing Burton hope with negative and cheating tactics you finish bottom of the table as for the referee he was poor but bad decisions swing in roundabouts over the course of the season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted October 14, 2017 Report Share Posted October 14, 2017 21 hours ago, italian dave said: If that's a foul by Brownhill then the first half challenge on Fammy is a nailed on penalty. This is precisely it. If that contact had come from a defender in their own box the ref would never give a penalty for it. Yes there was contact between the two players, but there's no contact. I think the Burton player was leaning into JB trying to hold him off and didn't manage it so he fell over and cried foul. Very disappointing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chappers Posted October 14, 2017 Report Share Posted October 14, 2017 10 hours ago, Packman said: We couldn’t break them down??? We did break them down and had a perfectly good goal disallowed again, just like last season against burton. How does being robbed by a decision like that not even slightly annoy you?? I was fuming when I saw the highlights. Maybe because I've seen it so many times, both for and against us. Refs are human, they make mistakes, although in this case a couple of friends who don't support City could see why it was disallowed, although did agree it was a tad unlucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 15, 2017 Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 On 14/10/2017 at 12:49, Rudolf Hucker said: What poor arguments. This wasn't a cup match between a plucky non-league team and a top Prem side; it was two teams of Championship quality supposedly competing against each other in October - just 12 games into the season. Arguments about how City would set out to perform against ManU or Spurs are completely facile and redundant when discussing a meeting of peers. What I am sure of is that City would not resort to such downright, blatant cheating. That Clough could send his team out to perform in such a way (a plan which presumably was hatched during their recent "team bonding" break in the sun") is all that is wrong in football and is not worthy of people defending their approach. Last season, I was pleased that Burton stayed up. No more. I hope that they are relegated before Easter. If Nigel's dad was alive today he'd be turning in his grave at what his son had done to football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 15, 2017 Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 17 hours ago, BigTone said: You win some & you lose some. Hey Ho !! And you draw some ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted October 15, 2017 Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 7 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: If Nigel's dad was alive today he'd be turning in his grave at what his son had done to football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted October 15, 2017 Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 7 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: And you draw some ! Are you Tony Hart? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pillred Posted October 15, 2017 Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 On 10/14/2017 at 00:01, Ian McGibbon said: Contrast the teams City lost £13 or so million last year, we made a small profit. You are small fry in the Championship and doing brilliantly this season, but you are a massive club compared to us. It is all about context and if we do gp down I guarantee we will have a business plan that ensures we do not go into liquidation, in fact we will probably makes a small loss followed by a small profit. we are an average championship side growing larger as we speak, our average gate last season was around 20,000 hardly small fry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 15, 2017 Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 2 hours ago, downendcity said: Are you Tony Hart? Anthony . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 15, 2017 Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 2 hours ago, downendcity said: Subtlety doesn't work for some of you , does it now ? You either get it or you don't. Now we all know which camp Downend City falls into, bless him . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted October 15, 2017 Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 18 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: Subtlety doesn't work for some of you , does it now ? You either get it or you don't. Now we all know which camp Downend City falls into, bless him . Come, come Major - no need to get personal. There is no justification for accusing me of effeminate tendencies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dolman Pragmatist Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 On 10/14/2017 at 10:17, Bar BS3 said: There were 4 minutes added. Maybe you over guestimate the head injuries. Time doesn't get added on generally for time wasting, unfortunately. Well throughout the game the referee was indicating that he had spotted the timewasting by pointing to his watch, so I assumed he would add on time, but he added none. It's quite customary in the Prem to play two or even three minutes beyond the time the 4th official has allowed, so there can be no excuses for him not adding on time on Friday. It would be very interesting if time-keeping in soccer followed the rugby model where the clock can be stopped. A report by Soccer Metrics a few years ago suggested that the ball is usually only in play for between 50 and 60 minutes in any premiership match (the actual range was from 44 minutes to 66 minutes). Anyone fancy 20 minutes added time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hertsexile Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 Let’s face on Friday night the man in the middle had a bad day at the office. After the match a Burton fan even said that so we take the rough with the smooth. Still unbeaten at home. COYR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcfcredandwhite Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 I wonder what the odds were for a 0-0 draw? Anyone see the ref sneaking out of the bookies with a wad of cash? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midred Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 52 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said: Well throughout the game the referee was indicating that he had spotted the timewasting by pointing to his watch, so I assumed he would add on time, but he added none. It's quite customary in the Prem to play two or even three minutes beyond the time the 4th official has allowed, so there can be no excuses for him not adding on time on Friday. It would be very interesting if time-keeping in soccer followed the rugby model where the clock can be stopped. A report by Soccer Metrics a few years ago suggested that the ball is usually only in play for between 50 and 60 minutes in any premiership match (the actual range was from 44 minutes to 66 minutes). Anyone fancy 20 minutes added time? I'm never sure whether the referee or the 4th official adds the time on. Is there any consultation between the two (for what it's worth)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 I thought with video technology we could have reviewed the ref's decision ? Isn't that what it's for ? to be sure that key moments like this are called correctly . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Major Isewater said: I thought with video technology we could have reviewed the ref's decision ? Isn't that what it's for ? to be sure that key moments like this are called correctly . Tbh if the ref looked at that again he would still give it as a foul. I don't think it is mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View from the Dolman Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 32 minutes ago, Midred said: I'm never sure whether the referee or the 4th official adds the time on. Is there any consultation between the two (for what it's worth)? The referee decides it, communicates it to the 4th official via the radio comms system and then displays it on the board. 3 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: I thought with video technology we could have reviewed the ref's decision ? Isn't that what it's for ? to be sure that key moments like this are called correctly . We don't have video technology here - only goal line technology . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 19 minutes ago, Super said: Tbh if the ref looked at that again he would still give it as a foul. I don't think it is mind. It would be the fourth official who decides not the ref. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 21 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said: The referee decides it, communicates it to the 4th official via the radio comms system and then displays it on the board. We don't have video technology here - only goal line technology . Maybe next year then ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 15 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: It would be the fourth official who decides not the ref. Still would be the same decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 23 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: Maybe next year ! Send in the clowns then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 1 hour ago, Super said: Still would be the same decision. If there was the smallest chance that the fourth official would give the goal then would you accept it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midred Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 1 hour ago, Major Isewater said: If there was the smallest chance that the fourth official would give the goal then would you accept it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobintheRed Red Posted October 16, 2017 Report Share Posted October 16, 2017 On 13/10/2017 at 23:09, Stortz said: Come on Packman, I'm pissed right off by this evening too (and wonder what Brian would make of Nigel's- ahem- pragmatism) but you can't wish liquidation on a club like Burton just because they've done a job on us to get their point tonight. Save that for the gas and cardiff imo! They came with a game plan to be spoilers an acheived there aim we didnt have it in us to break them down the last thing you need is a ref that thinks its all about him and being a nause Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.