Newcastle United 1-0 Arsenal (04/11/23) - Post match reaction from p. 46

[FCB]

Arsenal twitter is a fun place to browse tonight.

[Jonas]

The ball looked no more out than modern corners look out of the corner section on any angle.

I still cant always get my mind around how they look having been so used to them being clearly within the quadrant but if someone scores from one of those corners now nobody would analyse it.

 

 

Edited November 4, 2023 by Jonas

[Wolfcastle]

12 minutes ago, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

 

In slow mo or freeze frame it looks a lot worse. It would have been incredibly soft to give it, imo. Just looking for reasons to disallow goals these days, annoys me greatly, and not just for us. 

You could disallow most goals that have ever been scored by applying modern rules/forensics to them.

Maradona's great goal against England, in hurdling someone he had both feet of the ground - dangerous play.

[NEEJ]

Captain Black can fuck right off. Think he's Undesirable No. 1 these days, the creep. 

[christ]

The ball was comfortably in. Absolutely zero idea what all the pissing and moaning is about.

 

Joelinton did foul Gabriel though. Quite funny that got waved away.

[andycap]

The point is they checked all angles and couldn't make out if it went out fully or not. So that's a goal tough titties arsenal. Last year joelinton against southampton had a goal chalked off because of something similar as the ref had blown so they wouldn't reverse the decision. 

[Kanji]

I’m sorry but the ref allowed play to go on, he gave the goal. No single piece of video or tech evidence could conclude the ball was officially out. Nor was the alleged push clear as Gabriel was leaning forward and swan dove after the “push” and his reaction looked massively delayed. 
 

Perhaps goal line tech should be applied to the full pitch? Fuck knows.
 

This is hardly the most egregious controversial goal given in football. Same goes with Bruno’s forearm check on Jorginho - people swing and grab necks and it doesn’t get called, people shove and that’s often Ok, people lunge off the ground full pace and if they connect with a leg they will break it but that’s ok? 

 

 

Edited November 4, 2023 by Kanji

[Stifler]

2 minutes ago, christ said:

The ball was comfortably in. Absolutely zero idea what all the pissing and moaning is about.

 

Joelinton did foul Gabriel though. Quite funny that got waved away.

It wasn’t a foul, that’s actually the least controversial aspect of the decision.

The whole soft fouls that have been given in recent years has got us to the point in thinking it’s a foul.

Using your hands to gain leverage has always been allowed, it’s down to if excessive force is used to determine if it’s a foul. It’s a bit like the fouls on goalkeepers that are not fouls but accepted as they are.

[Cf]

3 minutes ago, christ said:

The ball was comfortably in. Absolutely zero idea what all the pissing and moaning is about.

 

Joelinton did foul Gabriel though. Quite funny that got waved away.

 

It was 50/50 to me. Joelinton has a right to go in for the header but the defender is weak and is going to ground without Joelinton's help in a misjudged header. But then Joelinton does help him on his way, partly because of the position the defender put himself in. 

 

Wouldn't be arguing too strongly if it was given as a foul but given its arguable either way just give the benefit of the doubt. 

[Stifler]

1 minute ago, Kanji said:

I’m sorry but the ref allowed play to go on, he gave the goal. No single piece of video or tech evidence could conclude the ball was officially out. Perhaps goal line tech should be applied to the full pitch? Fuck knows. This is hardly the most egregious controversial goal given in football. Same goes with Bruno’s forearm check on Jorginho - people swing and grab necks and it doesn’t get called, people shove and that’s often Ok, people lunge off the ground full pace and if they connect with a leg they will break it but that’s ok? 

Goal line technology actually does apply all the way across the pitch due to how the camera’s are set up for it. You can see both all the way down the lines from both sides, and from above, although the above bit maybe limited to just above the goal.

VAR have access to this, TV broadcasters generally do not.

[relámpago blanco]

Defender was diving to head the ball, it wasn't offside. So there wasn't a foul or offside. Ball looked out toe but I don't give a fuck we won.

[relámpago blanco]

Havertz was a clear red though. How many times does he get away with it

 The blokes a dangerous prick.

[Wolfcastle]

20 minutes ago, Kanji said:

Gabriel probably can sell the foul better if he doesn’t swan dive a second after the “push”

Yeah foul or not he should be getting his arse kicked for how weak he was in that situation, cant take chances of getting a free-kick when its a certain goal for the opposition if its not given.

[MrRaspberryJam]

Just watched Artetas presser saying it cost them 3pts hahahaha. Not only did they not even score Pope didn’t even have a single thing to do apart from punch a few crosses away. 

[Stifler]

Just now, relámpago blanco said:

Havertz was a clear red though. How many times does he get away with it

 The blokes a dangerous prick.

It was.

I would say Bruno’s is a red as well, but if Havertz is given a red for his foul, then I doubt Bruno does what he did.

It was reckless, he had no control, and he had no intent to get the ball. It is the decision that we should be looking at as controversial, but instead they are focussing on the goal.

[Adam]

Keown crying on MOTD is fucking glorious. Doesn't like it when his team isn't getting the decisions. 

[Upthemags]

13 minutes ago, Kanji said:

I’m sorry but the ref allowed play to go on, he gave the goal. No single piece of video or tech evidence could conclude the ball was officially out. Nor was the alleged push clear as Gabriel was leaning forward and swan dove after the “push” and his reaction looked massively delayed. 
 

Perhaps goal line tech should be applied to the full pitch? Fuck knows.
 

This is hardly the most egregious controversial goal given in football. Same goes with Bruno’s forearm check on Jorginho - people swing and grab necks and it doesn’t get called, people shove and that’s often Ok, people lunge off the ground full pace and if they connect with a leg they will break it but that’s ok? 

 

 

 

Arsenal would do well to take the Gabriel dive/no-call as a lesson: if you go around diving the whole match, the ref is going to be more likely to swallow his whistle on borderline calls plain and simple.

[Mike]

 

[bigfella]

1 hour ago, midds said:

Remember when we were utter shit and these teams ran over us without breaking sweat? Remember when the odd goal here and there never mattered because there was a yawning chasm between the 2 sides on display?

 

Now you have moaning wankers like Arteta virtually crying because things aren't going their way any longer. We've absolutely arrived on the scene and are here for the duration. We're no longer a push-over and a soft-touch, we're taking points from them and knocking them out of Cups now. Fucking elbows out and punching our weight and they hate it. We're extra competition and they don't know how to react, it's beautiful. 

 

[The Butcher]

Lego haired cunt

[McDog]

[TheBrownBottle]

58 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Goal line technology actually does apply all the way across the pitch due to how the camera’s are set up for it. You can see both all the way down the lines from both sides, and from above, although the above bit maybe limited to just above the goal.

VAR have access to this, TV broadcasters generally do not.

There’s no secret VAR cameras.  The feed can be seen by the broadcasters.

 

BeIN has confirmed it was in using their own 3D modelling software, though. 

[Stifler]

4 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

There’s no secret VAR cameras.  The feed can be seen by the broadcasters.

 

BeIN has confirmed it was in using their own 3D modelling software, though. 

That’s not true, broadcasters have been quite clear that VAR have access to more camera’s than they do. We have actually had numerous incidents where this has cropped up, one time when those lines that went diagonally were shown and they came out and clarified that those images were broadcasters images, not VAR images.

 

As I say though, the nature of the goal line technology is that there is a camera along the goal line from each side, as well as others at other points, some of which include top down angles. 

[TheBrownBottle]

33 minutes ago, Mike said:

 

Tbf, they acknowledge it’s in play and not offside - it’s the push that’s contentious 

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, Stifler said:

That’s not true, broadcasters have been quite clear that VAR have access to more camera’s than they do. We have actually had numerous incidents where this has cropped up, one time when those lines that went diagonally were shown and they came out and clarified that those images were broadcasters images, not VAR images.

 

As I say though, the nature of the goal line technology is that there is a camera along the goal line from each side, as well as others at other points, some of which include top down angles. 

We get to see the VAR officials playing with the feed.  Rewinding it etc.