MOTM-The ref!

[Samwam27 606]

Watched the game last night at a friends (albeit with sound off) and cannot understand why we weren't given an early penalty when replays seem to show a clear push.

And then Ref gives away an incredibly soft penalty for Watford, Gibbs but brushes the player, both his legs are already off the ground and he's clearly looking for a penalty, which Ref obliges.

All game Watford players were on the ground as if their careers had ended, yet replays show no or little contact.

Ref was awful and duped all game by the theatrics and time wasting and was MOTM for that performance!

Not going to mention our awful defending yet again, 2 sloppy goals conceded with players just ball watching, and not looking to stay with their man. Same every week. Hanley yet again several headers in attack but can never hit a barn door from 2 paces.

I don't dislike Smith, but am slowly getting frustrated that performances just don't seem to be improving (e.g. defending-but that's been cr*p for 5 seasons now, midfield owning that area etc)

[cambridgeshire canary 7,797]

Their penalty was a flop of the year while the one we should have got was stonewall.

 

But this is the championship so I'm used to it

[Capt. Pants 5,008]

I didn't think either were pens and wouldn't have got freekicks elsewhere on the pitch.

The trouble is few of our players appealed or complained or got round the ref. Little reaction from Sargent.

We have really got to get smarter and start influencing refs more.

[NWC 315]

Also I haven’t seen a ski mo replay, but I think our disallowed goal was potentially on side. Their no.5 was keeping Pukki level with an outstretched leg. VAR would have given that for a top 6 team. 
Agree with our pen - push in the back of Sargent - should have been a pen. 
But all of this is masking what was a very weak performance. 

[Ken Hairy 4,272]

They should have been either both given or neither given. Ours certainly wasn't stonewall but you have to give it if you're giving the Watford one. 

[Canaries north 155]

The goal was offside sadly, also I believe both penalty shouts were weak but in the end I don't think it made a difference to the game in the end. Also with the time wasting, appart from the first 20 minutes of the second half we didn't look like doing anything even if we were still there now. We were poor and that's the facts. We are a workman like team that will be too good for most in this division but we really lack the flair to open up a half decent team who protect a lead. 

[canarydan23 4,761]

47 minutes ago, NWC said:

Also I haven’t seen a ski mo replay, but I think our disallowed goal was potentially on side. Their no.5 was keeping Pukki level with an outstretched leg. VAR would have given that for a top 6 team. 
Agree with our pen - push in the back of Sargent - should have been a pen. 
But all of this is masking what was a very weak performance. 

Pukki looked well offside to me.

[king canary 8,754]

2 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Pukki looked well offside to me.

He was.

The penalties were annoying as I don't see how you give one but not the other. However ours would have been soft and Watford missed theirs so no harm done really.

[Ken Hairy 4,272]

Pukki was definitely offside, no complaints there 

[Capt. Pants 5,008]

Lino flagged straight away. It was a tight one but he looked off. 

The Watford players had stopped as well.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

He was.

The penalties were annoying as I don't see how you give one but not the other. However ours would have been soft and Watford missed theirs so no harm done really.

If we go 1-0 ahead and then had it wrongly disallowed would it still have been no harm done?

I wish the players were less accepting of these things too.

 

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

48 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

If we go 1-0 ahead and then had it wrongly disallowed would it still have been no harm done?

I wish the players were less accepting of these things too.

 

You're right. We should get in the referee's face more. It has been part of everyone elses game for as long as I can remember. Even if it works once, like perhaps yesterday, going ahead could dramatically change the outcome.

[Capt. Pants 5,008]

17 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

You're right. We should get in the referee's face more. It has been part of everyone elses game for as long as I can remember. Even if it works once, like perhaps yesterday, going ahead could dramatically change the outcome.

The ref must have been thinking ah good no complaints, I must have got that right. Moan like hell and be was more likely to even things up at the other end.

I can't ever remember a dirty or moany Norwich team. Far too nice.

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,615]

Wow, 12 hours before a thread appears bashing the ref. Must be a new record, and probably means he did well. 

He did miss the foul on Sargent though; there were two hands in the back and a clear push forward. That's a penalty. 

The trip by Gibbs on Sarr was an obvious foul, with the only slight doubt being whether contact was inside or outside the area, but it was probably inside.

The offside against Pukki looked extremely tight and I'm not sure if he was off, but a couple of Watford players in the middle had stopped before the ball arrived at Sargent's feet anyway. 

[sgncfc 1,330]

We can't blame the ref for our full backs not being very good can we? The midfield is taking a lot of flak, but we lost that game because Aarons was so weak against Sarr and Byram went AWOL twice.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

20 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

We can't blame the ref for our full backs not being very good can we? The midfield is taking a lot of flak, but we lost that game because Aarons was so weak against Sarr and Byram went AWOL twice.

I don't think anyone is blaming the ref for that. I certainly don't. But I do blame him for not giving us a penalty. 

[corbs 147]

I noticed Sky covered the pen appeal re Sarge, and felt it was a pen, looked a clear push, a Tottenham fan in my pub shouted ‘stonewall’; pity but overall I think Hornets were better team. Is Sargent prone to not getting decisions I wonder? 

[Mason 47 1,924]

As with conceding 3 to Preston, we undid ourselves and I'm not blaming the ref for the loss. However, you can't give one as a pen and not the other (I think it's debatable Sarr was actually in the box as well).

From our view I was sure Pukki was onside but I'll trust other posters saying he was clearly off, no bother. But my biggest frustration was the ref warned their keeper for time wasting not long after their first goal before proceeding to not action any of the antics in the second half (noting of course that we would have been doing no different if we were winning).

Sarr in particular when subbed actually ran away from the dugout before looping back towards it

 

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

16 minutes ago, Mason 47 said:

As with conceding 3 to Preston, we undid ourselves and I'm not blaming the ref for the loss. However, you can't give one as a pen and not the other (I think it's debatable Sarr was actually in the box as well).

From our view I was sure Pukki was onside but I'll trust other posters saying he was clearly off, no bother. But my biggest frustration was the ref warned their keeper for time wasting not long after their first goal before proceeding to not action any of the antics in the second half (noting of course that we would have been doing no different if we were winning).

Sarr in particular when subbed actually ran away from the dugout before looping back towards it

 

I don't think he was clearly off. It was tight. But I accept the lino was giving what he believed was the right decision. I hate VAR so am well prepared to accept the way it is in the Championship.

[ricardo 8,034]

2 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

I don't think he was clearly off. It was tight. But I accept the lino was giving what he believed was the right decision. I hate VAR so am well prepared to accept the way it is in the Championship.

Looked off on the TV replay. It looked the correct decision.

[wcorkcanary 4,784]

Just now, keelansgrandad said:

I don't think he was clearly off. It was tight. But I accept the lino was giving what he believed was the right decision. I hate VAR so am well prepared to accept the way it is in the Championship.

He was offside, not that close either, looked it real time, confirmed in slo mo. Officials correct.

We'd have got that pen with VAR though.

But the offside was offside, VAR just would have pronged the agony of disallowed goal.

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

Just now, ricardo said:

Looked off on the TV replay. It looked the correct decision.

Agreed it looked correct but was tight enough to have gone the other way if the lino had blinked.

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

2 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

He was offside, not that close either, looked it real time, confirmed in slo mo. Officials correct.

We'd have got that pen with VAR though.

But the offside was offside, VAR just would have pronged the agony of disallowed goal.

I do hate a pronge I must admit 😂

Bit like snurges or muffled titters

Edited October 16, 2022 by keelansgrandad

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,789]

3 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

I wish the players were less accepting of these things too.

 

Holt would have gone nuts and been in the refs ear the whole game