Haha sorry about that.Yeah I do Voice of play by the way,often mistaken for voice of reason,must be because I talk so much reason!
But yeah agree was foul and they are normally given as such
It would have been a good goal in the 1950's
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Haha sorry about that.Yeah I do Voice of play by the way,often mistaken for voice of reason,must be because I talk so much reason!
But yeah agree was foul and they are normally given as such
Not really.
A ref should be watching a players intention. Did the WBA make a genuine attempt to win the ball? No, the ball was a foot over his head, he's not watching the flight of the ball, he's simply playing the keeper.
Haha sorry about that.
It would have been a good goal in the 1950's
He would of caught it if he wasn't fouledHe could and should have done better. I'm more annoyed at him for not dealing with it than I am with the ref tbh.
Posted this on another thread:
If you make a challenge for the ball but don't get the ball but impede the other player it's a foul. The boy wasn't even looking at the ball, his sole intention was to play the man.
It was another awful refereeing decision we've been on the wrong end of.
It was a foul all day long! I honestly believe if Pants had been playing well all season/hadn't made a mistake v West Ham then very few of our fans would be saying any other but when things aren't going well some people feel the need to attack people like a Yorkshire TerrierThere is plenty of our own fans who have stated at first look they thought not a foul and some still don't after watching replays.
There is plenty of our own fans who have stated at first look they thought not a foul and some still don't after watching replays.
I happen to think a foul,but also think with one look and spilt second to decide understandable to get wrong.
Then again I think most decisions with one look and spilt second to decide are never as easy as people make out,that is generally my opinion on most instances.
No bother mate
Aye so that makes it fine to just jump straight into him doesn't itFoul or no foul, Pant's invited it by not coming out and protecting himself by putting a knee out. That creates the space for him to catch it or punch it and it puts a knee into berahino's back.
Poor technique
Whether he jumped into the keeper or not it doesn't have to be intentional. You can still commit a foul without meaning toJust seen it for the first time, don't think the jump that took him into the keeper was a foul as I don't think it was intentional, the hand ball hard to spot, and did he kick the ball from his hands?
End of the day goal stood, nowt we can do
I thought that the initial challenge was fair, but the one that I thought was more contentious was on the floor when Pants had the ball in both hands?
Just how I personally saw it. Admittedly I watched it on the shittest stream the world had to offer, so not 100%. I thought he made an attempt at getting the ball. Pants should have came over the top and wiped him out. Instead he grab the ball then dropped it. Just my opinion.How on earth was it 'fair'? He jumped straight into him and didn't look at the ball once. His whole intention was to impede Pants.