Tom SAFC
Winger
Yeah have now realised I missed the keepers appeals. Still dont think it's a foul in a million years
-
The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Disallowed goal...
- Thread starter McGregor
- Start date
Maravilla
Striker
Think I've only seen two examples in the Premier League where the ref has been called over and still stuck with their original decision.
japs
Striker
Keeper was already committed and caught short, no difference whatsoever to the outcome but he knocked the keeper after all of that, so it is a foul. But I'd argue there were lots missed.
Lucky1985
Winger
Agreed. They need to scrap this “clear and obvious error” bollocks. And make it a tool the ref can use when they need it.
“On-field decision is a goal but I didn’t get a good look at it, can you check for offside and check if there are any reasons I can’t award the goal?”
Make it more engaging for the fans in the ground by showing the replays to the ref using the big screens so the fans can see it too, and then play the conversation between the ref and the VAR on the tannoy system.
So the ref then gets the replay straight away on the screen and the fans can hear him chat with the VAR about whether or not they think the keeper was impeded.
League Wan
Winger
The comical thing was it took ages checking for an offside and then when it couldn't find one it checked for a foul. Looked sus as fuck ,like they were trying their best to chalk it off. We got well and truly beaten no doubt,not in the mood to blame anything else but still made the little things look like they went against us
Not one Forrest player appealed for offside or a foul on the keeper, mind it would have been scant consolation for a poor performance by us.
Mnemonic
Midfield
Nordi got the ball and his momentum carried him forward.
Never a foul in a million years. He won the ball ffs.
MackemMagic
Striker
There was 2 checks in that time to be fair
Lucky1985
Winger
Aye but in doing so he took the keepers right foot away which left him unable to jump properly for the Ballard header
Zero in the action. But some special super secret rule that's not written down that only refs know.
Mnemonic
Midfield
So what, that’s just normal contact, Nordi didn’t do that deliberately it was just his momentum.
If you win the ball, contact is very common but legal. The ref said it was tripping, what was Nordi meant to do, he couldn’t stop, so should he have not tried to get the ball???
Steesafc
Striker
I wonder what they'd have looked for next if it was decided there was no 'foul'.
joecphillips
Midfield
Ok then the alderete penalty, forest player got a touch on the ball, then stands on alderete’s foot
Being consistent that’s a foul as well
buster
Striker
We had a good laugh about it , check for offside then changed to check for a foul , they were always going to disallow it , really disappointing the south stand didn’t start singing the fuck VAR song.
Lucky1985
Winger
It’s not normal contact if it stops the keeper from being able to dive/jump
That wouldn't have been given a foul anywhere else on the pitch. Can you imagine if a defender half cleared the ball and an attacker got a tiny touch like that. What's the chances of a penalty being awarded? 
Absolutely zero chance. They regularly say, not enough contact. But it was blown up out of all proportion because it was a keeper. Ridiculous decision.
Absolutely zero chance. They regularly say, not enough contact. But it was blown up out of all proportion because it was a keeper. Ridiculous decision.
I thought the momentum was with us, whilst it was unlikely we would have got anything out of the game, we would have stood a better chance had that goal been given.
