|
Div
|
 |
« Reply #210 on: Tuesday, February 24, 2009, 23:51:32 » |
|
...or they haven't obtained the footage yet.
reckon the ref took it home with him, one to show the grand kids maybe? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
 Offline
Posts: 32380
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #211 on: Tuesday, February 24, 2009, 23:52:33 » |
|
think he took the 3 points with him as well, cunt.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jonny72
Offline
Posts: 5554
|
|
« Reply #212 on: Tuesday, February 24, 2009, 23:52:58 » |
|
That is utter gash, the ball bounced infront of Ifil and he put his boot through it to clear it. How the hell is that a fuck up. He kicked the fucking ball for christ sake.
It doesn't matter whether he made contact with the ball or not - his foot was high, at least chest height. When you do that with an opposing player near to you it doesn't matter whether you get the ball, the player or nothing - it is dangerous play and a free kick. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32380
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #213 on: Tuesday, February 24, 2009, 23:55:44 » |
|
It doesn't matter whether he made contact with the ball or not - his foot was high, at least chest height. When you do that with an opposing player near to you it doesn't matter whether you get the ball, the player or nothing - it is dangerous play and a free kick.
So you'd rather Ifil let it bounce inside our area. Bollocks, the ball was bouncing and was there to be cleared, Ifil cleared it. Clearence like that must happen loads of times in every single game. Ifil cleared the ball - that was all. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Div
|
|
« Reply #214 on: Tuesday, February 24, 2009, 23:57:47 » |
|
It doesn't matter whether he made contact with the ball or not - his foot was high, at least chest height. When you do that with an opposing player near to you it doesn't matter whether you get the ball, the player or nothing - it is dangerous play and a free kick.
matters if you make contact with the player or not though... chest height is nothing though, how many players head the ball at chest height? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jonny72
Offline
Posts: 5554
|
|
« Reply #215 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 00:00:10 » |
|
So you'd rather Ifil let it bounce inside our area. Bollocks, the ball was bouncing and was there to be cleared, Ifil cleared it. Clearence like that must happen loads of times in every single game. Ifil cleared the ball - that was all.
Well letting it bounce and not raising his foot would have been a far better option than raising his foot, giving away a penalty and losing us a point. You're right that its the sort of thing that happens in every game and it isn't always penalised, but if you put your foot up high you're always running the risk and its a risk he didn't need to take. I thought it was dangerous and a free kick. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32380
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #216 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 00:02:03 » |
|
Well I thought it was fine and the ref was a fucking joke and that was never a penalty in a million fucking years and was probably the worst decision I have seen in 20 years
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Div
|
|
« Reply #217 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 00:05:10 » |
|
Well letting it bounce and not raising his foot would have been a far better option than raising his foot, giving away a penalty and losing us a point. You're right that its the sort of thing that happens in every game and it isn't always penalised, but if you put your foot up high you're always running the risk and its a risk he didn't need to take.
I thought it was dangerous and a free kick.
Fair enough, but its IDFK not a pen then. i think it was a fine clearance and i havn't seen it  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jonny72
Offline
Posts: 5554
|
|
« Reply #218 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 00:08:42 » |
|
I wasn't able to listen to the radio on the way home, did Wilson or any of the players or the referee explain the decision?
What did he give it for?
Was there contact?
Was it inside or out?
Did he say dangerous play or kicking an opponent?
Did he say why it was a penalty and not a indirect free kick?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32380
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #219 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 00:13:29 » |
|
Basically Wilson said the rules of the game state is should have been an indirect free kick, so the ref needs to check up on the rules.
He said we were poor but deserved a point, we were robbed.
He wasnt going to speak to ref because it wont change anything but the ref was wrong. Wilson said the ref would probably try to justify the decision to Wilson because he has to, but it will be wrong.
---------
Ref signalled at the time it was for high foot
The only contact was Ifil foot and the ball
It looked close so could have been inside or outside the box
I dont think it was dangerous play as it wasnt that high and Foley didnt even go in for it
It was a penalty because the ref doesnt have a clue and doesnt know the rules. Although I must admit untill Wilson mentioned it in his interview I didnt know that was the case, but I'm not a referee.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Danjackson10
|
|
« Reply #220 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 00:22:08 » |
|
*Official Rules*
Indirect Free Kick
An indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a goalkeeper,
inside his own penalty area, commits any of the following four offences:
• controls the ball with his hands for more than six seconds before
releasing it from his possession
• touches the ball again with his hands after he has released it from
his possession and before it has touched another player
• touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked
to him by a team-mate
• touches the ball with his hands after he has received it directly from
a throw-in taken by a team-mate
An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if, in the
opinion of the referee, a player:
• plays in a dangerous manner• impedes the progress of an opponent
• prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands
• commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12,
for which play is stopped to caution or send off a player
The indirect free kick is taken from the place where the offence
occurred (see Law 13 – Position of Free Kick).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Danjackson10
|
|
« Reply #221 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 00:30:00 » |
|
to be fair we didnt deserve much from that game! we were pretty woeful!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ibelieveinmrreeves
Should've gone to Specsavers
Offline
Posts: 3857
|
|
« Reply #222 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 00:31:17 » |
|
I wonder if its too late to back out for Tranmere...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Even men with steel hearts love to see a dog on the pitch.
|
|
|
jonny72
Offline
Posts: 5554
|
|
« Reply #223 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 00:38:26 » |
|
Basically Wilson said the rules of the game state is should have been an indirect free kick, so the ref needs to check up on the rules.
I'd be interested in whether any of the players or Wilson or anyone pointed out the error at the time to the ref. I'd have thought Wilson would have been within his rights to call the ref over and discuss it, but he didn't. I doubt any of the players knew about the rules either, judging by the way they acted. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
santasdead
|
|
« Reply #224 on: Wednesday, February 25, 2009, 01:23:13 » |
|
I'd be interested in whether any of the players or Wilson or anyone pointed out the error at the time to the ref.
probably spoke to the 4th official...cant believe for a moment that if he knew the rule at the time of te incident who wouldnt have spoke to anyone... if he read the rules as he got back to the changing room or one of teh backroom staff said the ref had messed up then fair enough. but something should have been said at the time if teh rules were known o well,just look forward i guess the game has been and thankfully gone |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
