Sho Time Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 This is £90m a season for clubs, how this hasn't been met with either a huge increase in refereeing standards or an earlier introduction to VAR is ridiculous. What's even worse is they are absolutely fucking NEVER held accountable, refereeing mistakes are so normalised in the game that there's weekly sections of SkySports dedicated to a fucking 'ref watch'. Why officials aren't pulled in front of the media to justify their decisions and perceived mistakes is absolutely criminal. As for these things even themselves out, what a load of shit. One wrong doesn't make a right, and it never fucking does anyway. VAR can't come soon enough, although not sure how it helps with the allocation of an extra 30-40 seconds in the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate End Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 JUST f*** OFF ALL REFEREES WILL YOU... Is how i feel right now. Spoiling the game. This shit could see us go down. Apparently it was the same Referee that gave the Salah penalty against us for the slight touch on the arm by Dummett Incredible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Fast forwarding now to the last four minutes to see where the extra minute came from. As for VAR I'm not sure, next season that goal wouldn't stand but I don't think there's enough to impede the keeper but "there's contact!"? We made a sub in time-on, which is an automatic 30 second addition. You could see the ref look at his watch in the 94th minute (the commentators mentioned it) and think "one more phase" - perhaps that decision is questionable but the refs union would agree 100% with that decision. The goal went in at 94.37 didn't it? 7 seconds "over". Whether it's a foul or not, whether Almiron was fouled or not, whether Moutinho should have been on the pitch - these are all different questions. But I don't think we can quibble with the time-on. No idea how the rules work but our sub took more than 30 seconds, not sure if that can be factored into it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonArmy1892 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Fast forwarding now to the last four minutes to see where the extra minute came from. As for VAR I'm not sure, next season that goal wouldn't stand but I don't think there's enough to impede the keeper but "there's contact!"? We made a sub in time-on, which is an automatic 30 second addition. You could see the ref look at his watch in the 94th minute (the commentators mentioned it) and think "one more phase" - perhaps that decision is questionable but the refs union would agree 100% with that decision. The goal went in at 94.37 didn't it? 7 seconds "over". Whether it's a foul or not, whether Almiron was fouled or not, whether Moutinho should have been on the pitch - these are all different questions. But I don't think we can quibble with the time-on. No idea how the rules work but our sub took more than 30 seconds, not sure if that can be factored into it Teams make subs in stoppage time when winning pretty much every game, coz the refs never add 30 seconds on, except when we do it of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John P Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 I've lost count of the number of games where we've been behind in injury time and then subs have been made during injury time / goalkeepers have taken the best part of a minute to take a goal kick etc and as soon as the clock ticks into the 'minimum amount of time added on' the ref blows the whistle immediately, regardless of whether an attack has been started or not. It's fucking sickening the number of vital decisions that have gone against us in the last few seasons. Add that to the fact that it's a clear foul and it makes it even worse. Keepers are protected more than outfield players for a reason - if you interfere with a keeper's arms or body it's a foul because it's preventing him from catching the ball, and if he doesn't then more often than not it'll result in a goal. This useless cunt just didn't care about that last night for some completely inexplicable reason. No doubt he'll be refereeing his next game and blowing for a foul as soon as anyone goes near the keeper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Has this Scott cunt reffed us in any other game other than last and Liverpool? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Has this Scott cunt reffed us in any other game other than last and Liverpool? Liverpool and Swansea from last season. Leeds and Cardiff from the promotion season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonArmy1892 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 "Scott cunt" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate End Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Wolves got given 9 minutes added on in their last match and scored when it when over the 9 minutes too I mean imagine getting that much help to get results They basically just let Wolves play till they score then blow the whistle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Which Wolves game got 9 mins added? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 LOLZ at people still being surprised at the standard of refereeing in the PL. If you haven't yet figured out the reason the standard is so poor then you haven't been watching closely enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordiesteve710 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Fast forwarding now to the last four minutes to see where the extra minute came from. As for VAR I'm not sure, next season that goal wouldn't stand but I don't think there's enough to impede the keeper but "there's contact!"? We made a sub in time-on, which is an automatic 30 second addition. You could see the ref look at his watch in the 94th minute (the commentators mentioned it) and think "one more phase" - perhaps that decision is questionable but the refs union would agree 100% with that decision. The goal went in at 94.37 didn't it? 7 seconds "over". Whether it's a foul or not, whether Almiron was fouled or not, whether Moutinho should have been on the pitch - these are all different questions. But I don't think we can quibble with the time-on. No idea how the rules work but our sub took more than 30 seconds, not sure if that can be factored into it I'm 99% sure that the rules are that the ref is supposed to add on the amount of time the sub takes. The 30 seconds thing is more a rule of thumb, or general guidance in applying the law. I'd also add that the 4 minutes displayed is the minimum time to be added on. Ie, even before the sub it could have been 4:30 to play. (Where last night's ref found that injury time is a different question altogether mind.) I'm more annoyed about the foul on the keeper last night-as soon as the arms go around the neck it has to be a foul no matter how soft the contact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Absolutely staggering the amount of our fans who actually think it wasn't a foul. Unbelievable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisMcQuillan Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Absolutely staggering the amount of our fans who actually think it wasn't a foul. Unbelievable. Way of the world isn't it. Whatever you think, just as many people think the exact opposite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
polkaDot Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Absolutely staggering the amount of our fans who actually think it wasn't a foul. Unbelievable. Way of the world isn't it. Whatever you think, just as many people think the exact opposite. one? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Absolutely staggering the amount of our fans who actually think it wasn't a foul. Unbelievable. Way of the world isn't it. Whatever you think, just as many people think the exact opposite. I disagree Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
triggs Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Fast forwarding now to the last four minutes to see where the extra minute came from. As for VAR I'm not sure, next season that goal wouldn't stand but I don't think there's enough to impede the keeper but "there's contact!"? We made a sub in time-on, which is an automatic 30 second addition. You could see the ref look at his watch in the 94th minute (the commentators mentioned it) and think "one more phase" - perhaps that decision is questionable but the refs union would agree 100% with that decision. The goal went in at 94.37 didn't it? 7 seconds "over". Whether it's a foul or not, whether Almiron was fouled or not, whether Moutinho should have been on the pitch - these are all different questions. But I don't think we can quibble with the time-on. One more phase ? As much as I want rugby style officiating in football that's too much. A ref isn't going to blow the final whistle when one team is almost in the other team's box like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bimpy474 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Fast forwarding now to the last four minutes to see where the extra minute came from. As for VAR I'm not sure, next season that goal wouldn't stand but I don't think there's enough to impede the keeper but "there's contact!"? We made a sub in time-on, which is an automatic 30 second addition. You could see the ref look at his watch in the 94th minute (the commentators mentioned it) and think "one more phase" - perhaps that decision is questionable but the refs union would agree 100% with that decision. The goal went in at 94.37 didn't it? 7 seconds "over". Whether it's a foul or not, whether Almiron was fouled or not, whether Moutinho should have been on the pitch - these are all different questions. But I don't think we can quibble with the time-on. One more phase ? As much as I want rugby style officiating in football that's too much. A ref isn't going to blow the final whistle when one team is almost in the other team's box like Well i refereed with two watches, watch one set at 45 minutes with an alarm to tell me 45 minutes we're up, the 2nd running the same but with any hold up in play i would pause this watch and restart it as the game did. As soon as watch one went off i would switch to the watch two, and as soon as that watch went off if there were no more delays, i blew up. I always blew no matter where the ball was, exactly as it should be imo, time was up when time was up. Luckily i never had anybody going in on goal one on one, or as a ball was about to go in the goal. I never had to adjust or think about that, as i said luckily, even then i would have blown when the watch 2 went off, well i reckon anyway Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Fast forwarding now to the last four minutes to see where the extra minute came from. As for VAR I'm not sure, next season that goal wouldn't stand but I don't think there's enough to impede the keeper but "there's contact!"? We made a sub in time-on, which is an automatic 30 second addition. You could see the ref look at his watch in the 94th minute (the commentators mentioned it) and think "one more phase" - perhaps that decision is questionable but the refs union would agree 100% with that decision. The goal went in at 94.37 didn't it? 7 seconds "over". Whether it's a foul or not, whether Almiron was fouled or not, whether Moutinho should have been on the pitch - these are all different questions. But I don't think we can quibble with the time-on. One more phase ? As much as I want rugby style officiating in football that's too much. A ref isn't going to blow the final whistle when one team is almost in the other team's box like No. Nobody expects them to. It's the previous ball that was defended and pinged well near the touchline when he should've blown -- around 4-7 seconds before the goal came. This is when a normal human would expect the final whistle to go, as the last "attack" had come to nothing, and we were already over the allotted time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John P Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Fast forwarding now to the last four minutes to see where the extra minute came from. As for VAR I'm not sure, next season that goal wouldn't stand but I don't think there's enough to impede the keeper but "there's contact!"? We made a sub in time-on, which is an automatic 30 second addition. You could see the ref look at his watch in the 94th minute (the commentators mentioned it) and think "one more phase" - perhaps that decision is questionable but the refs union would agree 100% with that decision. The goal went in at 94.37 didn't it? 7 seconds "over". Whether it's a foul or not, whether Almiron was fouled or not, whether Moutinho should have been on the pitch - these are all different questions. But I don't think we can quibble with the time-on. One more phase ? As much as I want rugby style officiating in football that's too much. A ref isn't going to blow the final whistle when one team is almost in the other team's box like No. Nobody expects them to. It's the previous ball that was defended and pinged well near the touchline when he should've blown -- around 4-7 seconds before the goal came. This is when a normal human would expect the final whistle to go, as the last "attack" had come to nothing, and we were already over the allotted time. This. They had what should have been their last attack and it was cleared. He then gave them another one and they scored. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Fast forwarding now to the last four minutes to see where the extra minute came from. As for VAR I'm not sure, next season that goal wouldn't stand but I don't think there's enough to impede the keeper but "there's contact!"? We made a sub in time-on, which is an automatic 30 second addition. You could see the ref look at his watch in the 94th minute (the commentators mentioned it) and think "one more phase" - perhaps that decision is questionable but the refs union would agree 100% with that decision. The goal went in at 94.37 didn't it? 7 seconds "over". Whether it's a foul or not, whether Almiron was fouled or not, whether Moutinho should have been on the pitch - these are all different questions. But I don't think we can quibble with the time-on. One more phase ? As much as I want rugby style officiating in football that's too much. A ref isn't going to blow the final whistle when one team is almost in the other team's box like No. Nobody expects them to. It's the previous ball that was defended and pinged well near the touchline when he should've blown -- around 4-7 seconds before the goal came. This is when a normal human would expect the final whistle to go, as the last "attack" had come to nothing, and we were already over the allotted time. This. They had what should have been their last attack and it was cleared. He then gave them another one and they scored. You're wrong, like. As said, 30 seconds added is standard for an extra sub. So 94:30. As also said, the ref isn't gonna blow right as the other team are about to attack/put the ball in the box. Here's play at 94:30 - A lot of complaints can be had about the goal. The time isn't one of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Only thing I'd argue about the time is that I'm not sure where the 4 mins came from. But fuck that, there's other more important factors in it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 fwiw just watching it back, 94:06 Ritchie hoofs it up to half way, Rondon misses it. Wolves hoof it back to our box 94:11 and it stays within 18 yards of our goal line until the goal. Dunno where this "pinged well near the touchline when he should've blown -- around 4-7 seconds before the goal" is Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 fwiw just watching it back, 94:06 Ritchie hoofs it up to half way, Rondon misses it. Wolves hoof it back to our box 94:11 and it stays within 18 yards of our goal line until the goal. Dunno where this "pinged well near the touchline when he should've blown -- around 4-7 seconds before the goal" is Going by memory, as I haven't had the luxury of rewatching it afterwards. It felt like the ball had gone outside the box before it got to Traore (?) in that photo posted above. Could be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 It did, Ritchie blocked that creep's shot, and then he ran back and got it and then went to cross it. Regardless, Almiron was fouled and the game should have been killed off then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now