He got the ball.

[AJ 1,359]

Gods sake. This official has actually been useless! [:(]. Cheated.

[AJ 1,359]

Ooh, Ref said he got the ball, lino said it was penalty. No fair!

[Ivana_rubyatitz 6]

The stupid thing is it was the assistant (who was closest and had a clear view) that called it not the ref.  No way was that a penalty if the tug on Holt in first half was not.

[Attleborough_Canary 96]

Initially the ref even signalled he got the ball, now if he saw Martin get the ball why then go along with the lineo?? Weak refereeing

[The Chirp 0]

i dont normally get pissed off but that was dire... skysports commentator is saying it was a hard decision... if there is a doubt you dont give it... how on earth the lino didnt see the touch good knows. utter joke.

[Attleborough_Canary 96]

add that decision to the pen we should have had, the elbow in the back of Holts head, the swinging arm aimed at Holt and numerous smaller decisions I think the officiating has been awful!

[Largey 0]

The ref made the right decision in going with what his lino said, whether or not the lino got it correct is a different matter. If you''re not going to trust your lino from that position then there is no point in having linesmen.

Either way, we continued with the long ball tactics and once Hughes went off we lost all creativity.

[pete_norw 0]

[quote user="AJ"]Gods sake. This official has actually been useless! [:(]. Cheated.
[/quote]

Yes never a penalty, and we thought DUrso was bad, this pillock let the Lino give it after he waved it away, what a joke  

[Attleborough_Canary 96]

[quote user="Largey"]

The ref made the right decision in going with what his lino said, whether or not the lino got it correct is a different matter. If you''re not going to trust your lino from that position then there is no point in having linesmen.

Either way, we continued with the long ball tactics and once Hughes went off we lost all creativity.

[/quote]

Sorry I disagree, if the ref saw Martin get the ball it simply is not a penalty! How can he give it when he has seen a touch?

[Panic 0]

I don''t often critisise referrees cos it''s a really difficult job, but he had a bit of a mare tonight.

McFranchise looked like they were intentionally going out to injure our players tonight and the ref didn''t do anything about it!!

[Downloads 35]

Of course it wasn''t a pen, but the question has to be asked, why lunge in the box when the ball is going away from goal and its right on the corner of the box. Little bit of inexperience i think.

[canaryjock 0]

Absolutely ridiculous refereeing. How can the ref be so sure that Martin got the ball that he signals that way then by seeing the linesman flag, he changes his mind? You''re either sure or you aren''t. Appalling, absolutely appalling. I''m so angry tonight now. [:@]

[Largey 0]

I don''t know that the ref did see Martin touch the ball, but what I do know is the linesman was in a much much better position to see what happened, and the ref has to go with what his lino has told him, as whats the point in having a lino there if the ref isn''t going to use him in situations like that?!

If the ref is unsure (which he couldnt have been 100% and would have favoured the defending team) he must use his lino, who has quickly signalled for a penalty. If the ref had chose to ignore his linesman who had a clear view from 10 yards, and go with his own iffy view, MK Dons fans would be shouting at their TV boxes!

[Beauseant 0]

 

It''s worth mentioning that this was the same lino who overlooked Powell''s blatant stamp on Holt in our box early on....

[Attleborough_Canary 96]

[quote user="Largey"]

I don''t know that the ref did see Martin touch the ball, but what I do know is the linesman was in a much much better position to see what happened, and the ref has to go with what his lino has told him, as whats the point in having a lino there if the ref isn''t going to use him in situations like that?!

If the ref is unsure (which he couldnt have been 100% and would have favoured the defending team) he must use his lino, who has quickly signalled for a penalty. If the ref had chose to ignore his linesman who had a clear view from 10 yards, and go with his own iffy view, MK Dons fans would be shouting at their TV boxes!

[/quote]

The ref seemed pretty sure he got the ball when immediately he signally just that. Why signal it when you aren''t sure thats what happened? Sorry mate, my opinion of course,if I was totally sure of something I wouldn''t change my mind would you?

[Daniel Taylor 0]

I''m fuming. The officials were dire today. The ref from a few yards away gave a free kick against Holt for him being elbowed in the head and doing nothing at all. He was brought down from behind at the end and no card, there was a lunge at the beginning and no card. He wouldn''t believe Holt on anything and topped it off with a poor penalty decision. Very very disappointing. Worst of all is you know Lambert will be hauled over the coals much like Roeder and Clark were against Bristol City.

[paul moy 235]

Martin should never have tried to tackle in that position and then we would not have to argue whether he got the ball or not !!  

[Largey 0]

[quote user="Attleborough_Canary"][quote user="Largey"]

I don''t know that the ref did see Martin touch the ball, but what I do know is the linesman was in a much much better position to see what happened, and the ref has to go with what his lino has told him, as whats the point in having a lino there if the ref isn''t going to use him in situations like that?!

If the ref is unsure (which he couldnt have been 100% and would have favoured the defending team) he must use his lino, who has quickly signalled for a penalty. If the ref had chose to ignore his linesman who had a clear view from 10 yards, and go with his own iffy view, MK Dons fans would be shouting at their TV boxes!

[/quote]

The ref seemed pretty sure he got the ball when immediately he signally just that. Why signal it when you aren''t sure thats what happened? Sorry mate, my opinion of course,if I was totally sure of something I wouldn''t change my mind would you?

[/quote]

Well he has got to signal something, and yes he could have looked to his lino first, but as I said, if you''re not going to use your lino in such a situation whereby the lino has a clear view on the tackle, much closer than the ref and a much better angle to see the movement of the ball, then when are you ever going to use the lino?! I''m still not convinced the ref was totally sure, or he wouldnt have even acknowledged the linesman.

[Nuff Said 5,973]

Be honest, if the tables were turned and it happened to us, we''d be adamant it was a penalty.Having said that, the ref was appalling [:@]

[norfolkchance1 0]

he got the ball but as i was watching it live it looked like a pen, anyway that ref looks like he is going to change out of his outfit and go on a killing spree he looks mental

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="AJ"]Gods sake. This official has actually been useless! [:(]. Cheated.
[/quote]

The word I''d use is corrupt!

[Shack Attack 0]

I can see why he gave it but the foul on Holt in the first half was a much more blatant penalty. He should have made more of a meal of it rather than just turning and looking quizzically at the ref [;)]

[Mr. Bump 0]

Never heard of the referee before and right now I''m wondering if this was his first ever game

[Mr. Bump 0]

[quote user="Mr. Bump"]Never heard of the referee before and right now I''m wondering if this was his first ever game[/quote]And you''d think that with us playing on a Monday night, they could have got a semi-decent official

[0ridgemanddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

[quote user="AJ"]Gods sake. This official has actually been useless! [:(]. Cheated.
[/quote]

The word I''d use is corrupt!

[/quote]

I''d prefer cheat and he isn''t the only one in this league.

[Iwan´s Left Foot 0]

Pen all day long

[Bill 1,788]

You are rightmany on here are not aware of that little known rulePenalty11. 7 (e) A player deemed to have played the ball BEFORE an opponent makes contact shall be deemed to have fouled the opponentthanks for reminding us all

[Jonnypncfc 0]

hi just got in from the kings! i had fight bout this! it really pi$$ed me off! i knew he got the ball! omg 2nite i have had the worst night ever!

[Bomber 57]

[quote user="Largey"]

The ref made the right decision in going with what his lino said, whether or not the lino got it correct is a different matter. If you''re not going to trust your lino from that position then there is no point in having linesmen.

Either way, we continued with the long ball tactics and once Hughes went off we lost all creativity.

[/quote]

I have on many occasions shouted at the tele saying why dont the ref use his linesman for that decision as that is what they are there for so cant complain that he used him last night - after all this is not the first time I have seen the linesman with the flag across his chest giving a penalty  especially if the ref is unsighted and it was such a close call on martin getting the ball i did not even convince myself he touched it until seen it 3 times on sky so cant blame the linesman for missing it - martin should never have challenged anyway the player was heading towards the touch line

[Bird Table 0]

[quote user="paul moy"]Martin should never have tried to tackle in that position and then we would not have to argue whether he got the ball or not !!  [/quote]You''re spot on! The argument of "he got the ball" hasn''t applied with modern referees for about, ooh, 10 years or more? It was a totally bone-headed challenge by Martin on a player who was heading away from goal.