Exiled in Texas

Lion - didn't you love the coverage that the game got, all the goals were reshown during the final credits too....especially liked how the female commentator kept calling them "the Mackems" instead of Sunderland. Hahahahaha

We love our smilies... http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/pmrye/Smilies/Saylor.gif

Gomes f***ed up, I never disputed that. I'm arguing against the notion that the referee did nothing wrong. The whole thing has been blown out of proportion. You'd think Clattenberg cost Tottenham 3 points for trying to keep the game flowing in the last few minutes (which would be to Tottenham's advantage anyway). I'm not even convinced Clattenberg saw him handle the ball, he seemed to be telling Scholes that it wasn't a Pen, and Nani's body was between the ref and the ball. Suppose it all hinges on what the conversation with the linesmen was about. The referee got it wrong then, to a ludicrous degree. He has no excuse for missing such a blatant (not to mention lengthy) handball. The stuff about the effect on the result is again irrelevant to my argument here. With Nani's body being between the referee and the ball, he lilkely didn;t see it. Now, the AR? No excuse there....he had to have seen it as he has a great view across the field. So my guess on what happened. AR sees handling, but Gomes picks up ball. AR sees no signal from referee, and continuing with a punt is a better play than a DFK from 2 yards of goal line, so he assumes play will continue with punt. Then Gomes has his brain fart, AR is looking to referee for direction, goal scored and then AR wants to talk to Ref. At this point AR will have mentioned handling - not sure why Ref decided to over rule him. No-one would have objected to the goal being disallowed and the DFK awarded for handling. A monumental cluster.

Advantage is signaled with two hands, open palmed and both arms upwards and outwards at 45 degrees. Play on - nothing there, is usualy signaled with a single hand, open palmed but arm down and forward. Clattenburg's two handed open palmed shrug was saying, why are you looking at me....I didn't stop play.

Have been replaying this incident from a ref perspective...to review what happened and how to apply the LOTG. It looks like referee saw no foul on Nani, but was up field and probably missed Nani putting his hand on the ball and pulling it back towards him as Nani's body was probably blocking his view of the ball. So referee sees keeper pick up the ball and wants to let play continue. Then keeper puts ball on ground (thinking that it's a DFK), and the rest is history. My question is why the AR did not flag Nani for handling the ball. At no time did the AR raise to flag for handling, so there was nothing for referee to call. AR even followed ball/keeper upfield as if ball was still in play (keeping his offisde positioning). At time that ball was on the deck and Nani was asking if it was live, referee was giving the open-palm display of "nothing there - keep playing" Only after ball was in the goal did the AR signal and then subsequently get overruled by the referee who awarded the goal. In all this - I think the AR is the problem for not flagging for deliberate handling by Nani.

Were you in the Sunderland end or the Newcastle end? I was a bit surprised when I came around the back of the Fulwell and saw that we had a turnstile open only for Newcastle fans and the queue was massive. I was in the section right next to the Roker, the mackems in the next section to us were going mental at us. I was standing next to a bloke who had a young kid on his shoulders, the kid must have been no more than 4 or 5 years old but the bloke wanted him to go so that he could tell his own kids about it. Was in the Sunderland end as it was my mate who got the tickets - I think we were about half way between the Fulwell end and the center circle. Was funny watching the Newcastle fans who had tickets in the Sunderland fans stands work their way to the front, find a steward then unzip their jackets to show off the b/w shirts, lob a punch or two then hope that the stewards pulled them out before they got hauled back into the mob. Most made it but a couple didn't get close enough to the front rown and got worked over before they got spat out. Ahh, but what a great day that was.

I was in the Clock Stand and loved it. Was also in Clock Stand with my mate from Sunderland (and his friends). Tremendous feeling watching the despare all around me.

http://www.reztronics.com/metronome.jpg

It's tough on Harper but I'm loving the fact that Krul is getting a chance to play and get the experience that he is always mentioned as not having. What's the point having promising youngsters if you never give them the opportunity to make the next step up. Might as well not have Krul if he is never going to have the chance to make the next step. I trust CH to let Krul gain experience from the game while Harper is out, and then decide what's best for Newcastle (both rest of this season and looking forward).

Barton 8 - bit generous, but he made a good fist of playing out of position, and those two Beckham-like crosses won us the game. Yep, West Ham looked good in the first half because the right Mid was AWOL in center and left midfield, meaning that right back had to meet the ball carrier up field, which opened huge spaces behind him. In first 10-15 mins I thought Hammers were going to run all over us through their left wing as we were completely missing a right side presence. Once Barton went back to playing right mid, then it eased up the pressure on Simpson and balanced our play.

Probably one less relegated if Liverpool are 18th. And the stars are aligned ......

Yes - teams just have to come to grips with the actual decrease in asset value over the life of the contract.

So Rooney decides that he doesn't want to sign a new contract with Man U. See out the contract, and then move on. Man Utd got what they paid for - i.e. Rooney for 5 years or whatever. Other than the drama of it all, and that fact that it's happening with a current Man Utd player, rather than a "soon to be" Man Utd player, I don't see how this is any different to some League 2 striker telling his club that he won't sign a new contract.

Glitter would take them up! Up the what?

When I certified as a referee I was told... "referees must start out perfect, and then must get better"

That's the whole issue regarding the discussion of 'psychological slavery'. I'm not saying they're on the take, but are mentally being conned and allow reputation and an 'easier life' to get in the way of true officiating. I absolutely agree that there's an aspect of psychological slavery in place for a referee. It starts with the Mummies and Daddies watching their little 3 yr old playing footie and wanting it all their way, and it continues right up through clubs games and academy and school and into the pros. Almost every decision is only 50% right - i.e. only half the players/fans agree, and the other half think that it was a bad call. The fact is that referees are often wrong - and even when they are right only half the players agree.

Sorry - all this talk of corruption etc is total bollocks. Corrupt means taking bribes or such to influence a game. Are you really saying that a referee is getting a brown envelope full of money to ensure that team X wins? Not likely. Now referees being pressured? For sure. Pressured to get the big calls right? - of course. Pressured not to get something wrong and change a game? - absolutely. Pressured to deal with the big game environment? - and let the players decide things? Yes. Yes, referees want to get the bigger games. But that means doing well in their game assessments, not by letting X team win. I would be pretty sure that all Prem League games are reviewed with the referee to go over the key decisions - what they saw, why they gave what they did etc. Take off the Team Glasses and take a totally unbiased look at a game. Or better yet, pick up the whistle and take on a competitive game - try refereeing a few games and see how much harder it really is when every decision you make has an instant reaction.

The Brown Ale logo or the Blue Star logo only seem acceptable because they are Iconic images associated with Newcastle as a city. I doubt that other local industries/companies logos would work as well, even if they were not SD. Even if you put up the logo of a financial company who employed 10,000 workers in Newcastle it would still look as bad as the SD logo.

Big Mal - Former Man Cty manager Malcolm Allison has died, Malcolm Allison, the coach who helped inspire Manchester City to great success in the late 1960s, has died at the age of 83. Allison arrived at City in 1965 as assistant manager to Joe Mercer. City went on to win the Second Division crown in 1966, the League title in 1968, FA Cup in 1969 and European Cup-Winners Cup and League Cup in 1970. Allison managed 11 clubs at home and abroad, leading Sporting Lisbon to the Portuguese League and Cup in 1982. He took charge of Crystal Palace on two separate occasions, and also had spells as manager of Bath, Plymouth, Galatasaray, Toronto City, Middlesbrough and Bristol Rovers. During his playing days, Allison made more than 250 appearances at centre half for West Ham, before losing a lung as the result of tuberculosis in 1958. "Big Mal" - as he was known - always had an eye for publicity, and was famed for the "Lucky Fedora" he wore during one of Crystal Palace's Cup runs and his love of cigars - but his later years were dogged by ill health. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/9096162.stm

But if they can sell the club for more money that they owe their creditors (RBS), then the club is not insolvent. True the owners are set to loose £140M between them, but the club is still worth more than their debts, so only the owners loose money during the sale. (in simple terms)

The LOTG are clear about what is a foul - kicking, triping, pushing etc. The opinion part it is whether the referee actually think that a trip, or kick or push etc actually took place. (see De Jong vs Ben Arfa or either of the two penalty decisions for a difference in opinion from the referee and others). Foul recognition is all about the referee's opinion about what is/is not a foul.

Actually not quite true - the Dallas Stars bankruptcy protections expired on September 1st this year, but there are no plans to force the team into full bankruptcy.

Fouls are opinion. Throw-ins, corners, goal kicks are fact. Being in an offside position is fact, but not illegal. It's the involvement in play that is "in the opinion of the referee"

NESV you are our saviours!! We love you. Wait, hang on. Better bid elsewhere? NESV **** off we never liked you anyway.......Mr Lim, you are our saviour! We Love you!!

These are two separate issues - on field decisions and post-game review. IMO the post-game review is the easier of the two to implment, and could be brought in very quickly if they wanted to. The On-Field decision making is a much bigger issue and should be dealt with separately as it's got many more points to work through and could easily get bogged down in technical discussions. Focus on the Post-Game review and it could be brought in easily.