Johnson's "handball"

[lake district canary 4,531]

How did the officials come to the decision that it was handball for Johnson''s disallowed goal?   It seems to me in light of the recent foul on John Ruddy which went undetected suggests we were unlucky on both occasions.  For Johnson''s goal the referee allowed the goal and the linesman didn''t flag and had started running back to the halfway line for the kick off.  So how was it decided it was handball?  The fourth official?  The intimidation from the Huddersfield players?   Johnson''s muted celebration?   A mixture of all three? Seems odd to say the least. 

Since the match, has Neil said anything about it, or has Johnson?    I can accept it was handball - if it really was - but what were on earth were the officials doing?   Looks on the highlights as if they were intimidated into changing the decision.

[Tim Dawson 0]

Spot on LDC it was embarrassing the way that after giving the goal ( both linesman and ref) they were then Chelsea style surrounded and the crowd bayed until they changed their mind, dare i say had the linesman bn a bloke it may not have happened, but it was a farce, seen nothing like it in my life mate.

[stoke canary 0]

Linesman mmmmmmmm Is that where the problem was ??

[YankeeCanary 0]

 

I would suggest we follow the lead of the manayger. Alex Neil is not looking for excuses or wanting to dwell on bad luck at this critical stage or even to compliment the team in the wrong way. He knows that''s not what will get the job done. I was really pleased with his post-match response yesterday when the interviewer, lobbing him a softball, asked, "Were you really pleased with how the team came back at the end?"  Neil didn''t offer anything other than a simple, "No, we were there to win the match and we didn''t do that." 

[......and Smith must score. 1,332]

All this banging on about handball is meaningless.

If Johnson handled the ball yesterday then a correct decision disallowed his goal.

Going back to the Derby game last week there was a clear foul on Ruddy but isn''t it strange how we then conveniently forget our blatant handball at Pride Park in the build up to our equaliser in the 2-2 draw there in Dec.

Some you get, some you don''t.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="......and Smith must score."]All this banging on about handball is meaningless.

If Johnson handled the ball yesterday then a correct decision disallowed his goal.

Going back to the Derby game last week there was a clear foul on Ruddy but isn''t it strange how we then conveniently forget our blatant handball at Pride Park in the build up to our equaliser in the 2-2 draw there in Dec.

Some you get, some you don''t.[/quote]

No one is banging on about it, just asking the question about the way it was handled by the officials.    Highly dubious, given the way it was given, all officials apparently returning to the half way line with no flag from the lino and the ref giving the goal.   Handball or not handball it was handled atrociously (excuse the pun).

[Tim Dawson 0]

[quote user="......and Smith must score."]All this banging on about handball is meaningless.

If Johnson handled the ball yesterday then a correct decision disallowed his goal.

Going back to the Derby game last week there was a clear foul on Ruddy but isn''t it strange how we then conveniently forget our blatant handball at Pride Park in the build up to our equaliser in the 2-2 draw there in Dec.

No you miss the point completely, not moaning about it changing the game or refs against us what i am saying is whether Johnson handled or not is irrelevant once a goal is given in such a manner you cannot bow to player and crowd pressure to reverse it, what planet are you from ??

Some you get, some you don''t.[/quote]

[The Walking Man 13]

By all accounts it was handball, I was at the other end of the ground so didn''t see it but I''ve been told it was.

The issue for me, isn''t whether it was handball or not but how it was given. The lineswoman didn''t flag and ref gave the goal. So how do you give the foul? It can only have been because of the reaction of the Huddersfield players, and that is a dangerous precedent.

[sonyc 5,488]

I spoke to a Huddersfield fan after the match and he said that the 4th official had communicated to the ref. not sure how he saw it. Sky indicated it WAS handball

[Webbo118 0]

The answer to this question is that it was disallowed following the viewing of video evidence. It has been common in recent times for the fourth official to look at controversial incidents on a monitor and then feed information to the referee. The referee did not see the handball and neither did the assistant. They were alerted to a probable mistake by the reaction of the Huddersfield players. You know the rest. This is typical of the dishonesty displayed by the football authorities - they refuse to use video evidence whilst secretly doing so. In the same way, they refuse to acknowledge that officials make mistakes. This was perfectly illustrated by the O''Shea/Brown sending off fiasco when they went to great lengths and made things much worse by attempting to justify the unjustifiable. All that was needed was "sorry, he made a mistake". That would have been the end of it. Instead, we got days when it was debated non-stop.

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="sonyc"]I spoke to a Huddersfield fan after the match and he said that the 4th official had communicated to the ref. not sure how he saw it. Sky indicated it WAS handball[/quote]

Exactly right. He saw it on Sky. But, as we all know, video evidence to review decisions is not allowed.

[sonyc 5,488]

I agree Webbo. It was a very strange decision and I''ve never seen players influence a ref like that AND for him to change his mind having given the goal. It was a dire performance by the referee ......there''s another thread about him.

[CJ 0]

I notice in highlights that the ref while talking to assistant suddenly put his hand to his ear clearly getting a message , like many I would not mind if this was common practice but is not as we discovered with Ruddy against Derby.

Alex should ask for report on the incident from FA as really was totally unacceptable not professional etc.

[Horse Renoir 1]

Ruddy was unquestionably fouled on Saturday but the decision went against us, Johnson did touch the ball with his arm but once again the decision went against us. It''s the inconsistency and the fact these calls always go against us that bothers me. I can''t help but feel the ref''s enjoy siding with the underdogs or feel like they can get away with fu(king NCFC over without repercussions because we''re a ''nice'' club who exists completely outside of the media spotlight.

I''m getting really, really fed up with officials spoiling the games for us now. Also the official who caved in under pressure from the Huddersfield players shouldn''t officiate at football league level again, that was completely unacceptable!

[lake district canary 4,531]

Fourth official saw it on video??  Since when has that been allowed??   Is that now accepted practice? 

[Webbo118 0]

Correct. It''s not. No, but it is frequently happening.

[yoda 0]

The whole thing made no sense and it was one that would never go in our favour in a million years

[......and Smith must score. 1,332]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="......and Smith must score."]All this banging on about handball is meaningless.

If Johnson handled the ball yesterday then a correct decision disallowed his goal.

Going back to the Derby game last week there was a clear foul on Ruddy but isn''t it strange how we then conveniently forget our blatant handball at Pride Park in the build up to our equaliser in the 2-2 draw there in Dec.

Some you get, some you don''t.[/quote]

No one is banging on about it, just asking the question about the way it was handled by the officials.    Highly dubious, given the way it was given, all officials apparently returning to the half way line with no flag from the lino and the ref giving the goal.   Handball or not handball it was handled atrociously (excuse the pun).

[/quote]

As you quite rightly say LDC refereeing decisions are often at odds with how it appears to others and of course they get it wrong. On balance I suspect they get most of them right..

Just pointing out how we always look at decisions that go against us as '' unlucky '' but those that go for us are somehow OK.

At the end of the day it''s all swings and roundabouts and things even themselves out over time whether it''s over one season or longer.

[Shyster 0]

Come on, man to man - the only involvement women should have within the game of football is for the sh@gging of.

Let''s be honest, ffs.

[Webbo118 0]

That old chestnut - "things even themselves out". This is a cliché trotted out by pundits on programmes like MOTD and picked up and subsequently repeated by people on message boards. It is a fallacy and there is no evidence for the statement. My concern is that the football authorities have declared on numerous occasions that they are against using video evidence to make decisions. They are, in fact, actually doing that in secret by having the fourth official examining incidents on a monitor and then feeding information to the referee - as happened last night. It''s about time the football watching public woke up and realised this.

[Shyster 0]

I personally think it''s about time the football watching public woke up, full stop.

[city4eva 207]

[quote user="......and Smith must score."]All this banging on about handball is meaningless.

If Johnson handled the ball yesterday then a correct decision disallowed his goal.

Going back to the Derby game last week there was a clear foul on Ruddy but isn''t it strange how we then conveniently forget our blatant handball at Pride Park in the build up to our equaliser in the 2-2 draw there in Dec.

Some you get, some you don''t.[/quote]Or wes,s dive at Watford

[Tim Dawson 0]

Video evidence my ar5e its not allowed its not rugby, and that 4th official must have bl00dy good eyesight, they bowed to pressure from players and the crowd so stop spouting rubbish, some of you idiots on here are beyond belief !!!

[Highland Canary 76]

In modern football, like it or not, it is the role of the crowd and players to put as much pressure on the officials as possible. These are professional sportsman - winning is all.

[......and Smith must score. 1,332]

[quote user="Webbo118"]That old chestnut - "things even themselves out". ..... It is a fallacy and there is no evidence for the statement. [/quote]

Fallacy ?

Recent decisions that went our way : Handball in the build-up to our second goal at Derby. Wes''s dive at Watford

Decisions that didn''t : Foul on Ruddy last weekend. Johnson''s disallowed goal on Tue.

Obviously there may be a long sequence of good or bad decisions but I''ll bet they do even themselves out in the end.

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

Utter rubbish about things evening out, there''s nothing at all to back that up other than cherry-picking examples. Did you not witness our PL seasons and the string of extremely dubious penalties given against us?

[Chip20 69]

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]Utter rubbish about things evening out, there''s nothing at all to back that up other than cherry-picking examples. Did you not witness our PL seasons and the string of extremely dubious penalties given against us?[/quote]

Is there any ''evidence'' that they don''t even themselves out? The penalties thing you allude to is perception, not incontrovertible evidence, and you are equally as guilty of cherry-picking these as examples. Did nothing go our way that season? No missed fouls in the build-up to our goals? No soft free kicks? No gamesmanship from any of our players? I presume you''ve scrutinised the entire season minute-by-minute for every single game played by every single team and documented every decision that went went both for and against the teams concerned? Otherwise, again, you are selecting examples to the exclusion of others based on your recollections and perceptions.

The bottom line is that these decisions going for and against us will nearly always be a matter of perception. You will rarely find the entire footballing world agreeing that any given refereeing decision should or shouldn''t have stood. Opinion will nearly always be divided and it will nearly always be the penalised team feeling hard done by and the team that gained the advantage feeling that the correct decision was made.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Tim Dawson"]Video evidence my ar5e its not allowed its not rugby, and that 4th official must have bl00dy good eyesight, they bowed to pressure from players and the crowd so stop spouting rubbish, some of you idiots on here are beyond belief !!![/quote]

Have to agree with you Tom.  Even if a fourth official had a brilliant view on a monitor - which I doubt, as there has been no video angle I''ve seen that is conclusive - then there are no rules that allow him to use that as a help to influence decisions.   Handball it probably was, but the decision making process was completely wrong.  The right outcome maybe, but there are no reasons that any other official than the ref or the linesman(woman) that the decision could or should have been changed.    Crowd influence, player intimidating, maybe the fourth official saw it clearly in real life from the half way line, who knows, but an explanation of the decision  and how it was made would have been interesting.

[Horse Renoir 1]

Just watched the highlights. I am fu(king furious! The ball was going in anyway and there isn''t a chance in hell one of the officials could spot that slight touch on Johnson''s arm. They gave the goal and the only reason it was chalked off is because of pressure from Huddersfield players.

That was fu(king disgusting, that weak bald tosser shouldn''t be allowed to ref again, neither should that daft, bias, weak div on the sidelines. They cost us the win the other night. Yet nothing will happen, the paying fans who travelled all that way will remain completely screwed and the officials will keep their cushy job, completely shielded from any sort of criticism and allowed to continue thinking they''re part of the attraction, part of the reason fans pay to watch football and that they have a right to affect games and stamp their personality on a match, thinking their controversial decisions are just part of the game that let''s them get some TV time.

I hope us fans remember that and give them some serious abuse if they ever officiate at CR

[......and Smith must score. 1,332]

Spot on Chip 20.

We always look at decisions from our own biased perceptive. A neutral might well see it differently.