Jump to content

Callum Wilson


Strawberry

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, Pilko said:

 

Haha, he's turned it back round and fair play to him. Those 15 games post-WC where he minced about offering no threat and missed any chance he did get were seriously worrying.

Didn't want to write him off in January or February, but come march I was accepting he wasn't the same player anymore. Today he looked as fit as he ever has for us, hopefully it continues

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever the reason for the past 3 months, it's a relief to see he still has these performances in his locker. I was wondering if he was past the point of no return.

 

Now it's just a question of working out what makes the difference and working to those criteria. I suspect they already know internally, mind.

 

If it's all about overworked legs and exhaustion, hopefully rotation and semi-backup status will work out perfectly for everyone next season.

 

I'm assuming Isak is back in on Saturday?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, 80 said:

Robbed of a goal from what I could see. Had his arm across his own stomach. What more could he do to avoid it?

 

Don't think it's down to whether it's intentional or not anymore unfortunately. I think if it hits your arm regardless it's ruled out. 

 

I may be wrong.

 

I probably am. 

 

Fuck it we won I'm gonna sink a few pints. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 80 said:

Robbed of a goal from what I could see. Had his arm across his own stomach. What more could he do to avoid it?

Irrelevant - if the ball hits his hand it’s automatically disallowed under the new laws

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 80 said:

Robbed of a goal from what I could see. Had his arm across his own stomach. What more could he do to avoid it?

Certainly wasn't a clear and obvious error - total guess from VAR whether it hit his arm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrRaspberryJam said:

 

Don't think it's down to whether it's intentional or not anymore unfortunately. I think if it hits your arm regardless it's ruled out. 

 

I may be wrong.

 

I probably am. 

 

Fuck it we won I'm gonna sink a few pints. 


Big Rod energy 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, MrRaspberryJam said:

 

Don't think it's down to whether it's intentional or not anymore unfortunately. I think if it hits your arm regardless it's ruled out. 

 

I may be wrong.

 

I probably am. 

 

Fuck it we won I'm gonna sink a few pints. 

Believe you're right but it's ridiculous. As I understand it, another rule changed to give VAR something to do/spoil.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jonny1403 said:

Irrelevant - if the ball hits his hand it’s automatically disallowed under the new laws

It hit the outside of his upper bicep from what I could see.

 

With the rest of his arm going across his body, meaning his silhouette was basically torso+shoulder.

 

 

Edited by 80

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Geordie Ahmed said:

It was not below the sleeve though? Surely that's a factor?

VAR certainly couldn't tell.  And if they can't tell - it is not an obvious error.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This sort of handball, where the arm is close to the body and if you didn't have arms it would have just hit the torso is ridiculously harsh. 

As others said, it hits the advert patch on his sleeve so I thought anything above the sleeve wasnt handball? 

They need to change the phrase "handball" then if we're top of the arm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...