Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
@NYCANARIES

Frame by Frame slo-mo

Recommended Posts

problem with the law is.its deemed intent to prevent a clear goal scoring opportunity.when forster came out. weston had the ball and it was there to go for, then...weston taps it away. and forster is stuck in no mans land, nowhere near a ball abd an obstacle a player has to negotiate.the key word is INTENT.and whether there was intent deemed, he was intent on denying a goal. getting the ball. but he failed and he denied weston and not the ball. He denied weston by being an obstacle of which (whether he could or not) he didnt avoid..to clear it up. i think they should make it a contact no contact thing. in order to stop the grey area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We havent bothered appealing, i think maybe Lambert and co are like me, just tired of the whole thing, yet another pathetic refereeing decision and are just gonna get on with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Norfolk Ned"]

For me, it ws there to be won and Weston had the intent to cheat the ref. Clear dive.

[/quote]when he came out it was. i agree. Then the ball got tapped right, then forster is stuck in no mans land. he is screwed. so. the intent is denying weston then and cant be the ball as the ball is wide of them both. Then weston goes over the top ("avoiding") forsters body. and falls over. deemed intent. if there was contact then maybe. thats why i think the rule should be adjusted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tired or not. We should. Goalies are entitled to go for the ball and at speed I understand the refs decision but appealing would highlight the dive. Weston will do it again and again if not punished. Divers are making a mockery of the game and robbing the fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Norfolk Ned"]Tired or not. We should. Goalies are entitled to go for the ball and at speed I understand the refs decision but appealing would highlight the dive. Weston will do it again and again if not punished. Divers are making a mockery of the game and robbing the fans.[/quote]i totally agree. im not saying weston is in the right, or that forster was wrong. But i think the law needs to ditch wording and be more black and white. less grey areas that cause controversy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Then the ball got tapped right, then forster is stuck in no mans land. he is screwed"

Thats football, doesn''t give you the right to sling yourself to the floor. Not to mention that after touching the ball its gone towards the corner flag. Whats Forster supposed to do? The keeper has the right to go for it. If he''s stayed on his feet and been clattered it may be different, but he didn''t, he dived. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Norfolk Ned"]

"Then the ball got tapped right, then forster is stuck in no mans land. he is screwed"

Thats football, doesn''t give you the right to sling yourself to the floor. Not to mention that after touching the ball its gone towards the corner flag. Whats Forster supposed to do? The keeper has the right to go for it. If he''s stayed on his feet and been clattered it may be different, but he didn''t, he dived. 

[/quote]very true, he went for the ball. and he could of got it. its clear weston has tapped the ball wide to avoid forster getting near it and he has gone over the top of him and claimed a penalty due to forsters position and him not getting ball but obstructing a player.i dont think for 1 second forster is impeding weston at all. but the grey area does seem to perceive it. will try and find the law up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agree on the grey areas. The FA really need to review the plays at the time or at least after. The game has evolved to the point where its needed now. Video replay for me. A fourth official can run the video back in seconds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For what it''s worth i can guarantee there was no contact, and the manner of Westons fall, and his bodily reaction at the "supposed moment of contact" only confirms that. As far as the rules are concerned at this moment in time that was most certainly not a penalty, and i believe that the replay (or better yet, the last one on that video) should confirm that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Shack Attack"]Still looks a pen to me. Sorry [:(]
[/quote]

Definitely a pen for me. Forster doesn''t get the ball, therefore a foul irrespective of where the ball then goes. A goalkeeper can''t just flatten the man and get away with it. Not sure about the red card though - don''t think he deliberately denied a goal scoring chance. A pen and a yellow for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="sgncfc"]

[quote user="Shack Attack"]Still looks a pen to me. Sorry [:(][/quote]

Definitely a pen for me. Forster doesn''t get the ball, therefore a foul irrespective of where the ball then goes. A goalkeeper can''t just flatten the man and get away with it. Not sure about the red card though - don''t think he deliberately denied a goal scoring chance. A pen and a yellow for me.

[/quote]I think you can tell a lot by the reaction of the other City players and there doesn''t seem to be a huge protest until the red card gets shown. Could the referee give a penalty and not send Forster off by the letter of the law? I didn''t think he could. A lot of people seem to be basing their opinion on Neil Adams'' comments during the Radio Norfolk commentary but just after the penalty he was criticising an offside decision and telling us he was in line with the last man just inside Gillingham''s half. So how could he be so sure it was a dive when he probably had a worse view than the fairly poor TV pictures we have [:^)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Norfolk Ned"] He dives with the ball heading out for a goal kick.[/quote]Sorry but there''s no way you can come to that conclusion from that video. The OP mentions an appeal but I can''t see any referee overruling the red card based on that evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="missing in action"]problem with the law is.
its deemed intent to prevent a clear goal scoring opportunity.
when forster came out. weston had the ball and it was there to go for, then...weston taps it away. and forster is stuck in no mans land, nowhere near a ball abd an obstacle a player has to negotiate.
the key word is INTENT.
and whether there was intent deemed, he was intent on denying a goal. getting the ball. but he failed and he denied weston and not the ball. He denied weston by being an obstacle of which (whether he could or not) he didnt avoid..
to clear it up. i think they should make it a contact no contact thing. in order to stop the grey area.
[/quote]

I''m not sure I''m 100% with you here.

I''m a referee myself and if Weston was adjudged to dive (simulation) then no matter what Forsters ''intentions'' were then it doesn''t matter.

Of course Forster is intent on denying a goal that is his job and about him being an obstacle, if Weston had indeed dived then their is no arguement.

The only instance where your above description would work is if a player had ''intentionally tried to ''hurt'' a player'' i.e. punch or ATTEMPT to punch, kick or ATTEMPT to kick re: Nick Bailey last weekend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="sgncfc"]

Definitely a pen for me. Forster doesn''t get the ball, therefore a foul irrespective of where the ball then goes. A goalkeeper can''t just flatten the man and get away with it. Not sure about the red card though - don''t think he deliberately denied a goal scoring chance. A pen and a yellow for me.

[/quote]

Doesn''t have to be delibrate. If it''s a foul then it''s a sending off. The offence is "denying an obvious goalscoring oppurtunity" mentions nothing about it being delibrate. If you deny a goalscoring oppurtunity you are off wheter your actions were delibrate or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry guys but it looks a penalty to me.  If it had happened at the other end we would all be saying it was nailed on.

I would be very disappointed if one of our players dived to win a penno.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Norfolk Ned"] He dives with the ball heading out for a goal kick.[/quote]Sorry but there''s no way you can come to that conclusion from that video. The OP mentions an appeal but I can''t see any referee overruling the red card based on that evidence.[/quote]I was there, and I remember at the time thinking the ball had gone off the pitch by the time Weston had hit the ground, not sure if you can see that on the highlights or not.At the time I thought pen, others then made me doubt it, but I keep seeing the highlights and all I can see if Forster blocking Weston.  He did not make contact, but he was an obstacle.  Then again if a player stood his ground in the box, and someone ran into him it would not be a pen.  Forster made no attempt to take the man, and actually pulled out of the challenge if anything, therefore if there is no intent, there is no pen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The whole obstacle thing doesn''t make sense, thats the goalkeepers job, to be an obstacle, I was there, and had a great view, and there was no contact, therefore it was not a penalty, the keeper has every right to dive at a strikers feet, they do it all the time, but the fact that their was daylight between Weston and Forsters hand, makes it even more sickening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Shack Attack"]

I think you can tell a lot by the reaction of the other City players and there doesn''t seem to be a huge protest until the red card gets shown. Could the referee give a penalty and not send Forster off by the letter of the law? I didn''t think he could. A lot of people seem to be basing their opinion on Neil Adams'' comments during the Radio Norfolk commentary but just after the penalty he was criticising an offside decision and telling us he was in line with the last man just inside Gillingham''s half. So how could he be so sure it was a dive when he probably had a worse view than the fairly poor TV pictures we have [:^)]
[/quote]

Not sure what half Neil thought he was in but the press box was definitely in the Norwich City half in the first-half (and Neil was about five seats nearer to the away fans than us) so we had a fairly good view of the incident - far better than that of the TV camera angle. Still, all rather irrelevant now anyway...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All a matter of opinion.  Can''t say about the penalty because it is not a clear enough view to me.  Would have disallowed your equaliser v Charlton for a clear impediment on the keeper (my opinion) and wouldn''t have given Colchester''s first penalty v Hartlepool, would have given the second, but not the third, the last ball to hand I thought.

So, in short, no bloody use to anyone.[:O]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this can all be summed up very neatly; those people who were sat in the lower parts of block 6 could clearly see there was no contact and Weston dived as an after thought, and those that are relying on the video replay either think it was a pen or can''t decide therefore demonstrating the club are correct not to appeal.

Fact is though, the pen was given as was the red card and there is nothing we can do about it. For the record though, I blame the linesman, he should have been able to see it was a dive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was reffing I just gave it as I saw it - with or without help from the lino - and if people didn''t like it then hard bleedin'' luck.

They could all get off the arses in the stand (and the Press Box) and go and qualify and try it for themselves.

But so few do.[:|]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[:|][quote user="SimonOTBC"]I''m sure you can see though cam, why everyone is annoyed by what seems to be an incorrect decision which turned the game on it''s head.[/quote]

Nope, not really.  What I see is what the Ref gave.  He''s in charge, not the people in the stands nor in the Press Box.

If people in the stands or the Press Box think they could do it better they need to sign up to the next local Ref''s course and take it from there.

That''s what I think.

They also have message boards and discuss things.

http://www.footballreferee.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=6&sid=5b67ef0f7545858564acaed26cf2d039

[:|]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Camuldonum"]

[:|][quote user="SimonOTBC"]I''m sure you can see though cam, why everyone is annoyed by what seems to be an incorrect decision which turned the game on it''s head.[/quote]

Nope, not really.  What I see is what the Ref gave.  He''s in charge, not the people in the stands nor in the Press Box.

If people in the stands or the Press Box think they could do it better they need to sign up to the next local Ref''s course and take it from there.

That''s what I think.

They also have message boards and discuss things.

http://www.footballreferee.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=6&sid=5b67ef0f7545858564acaed26cf2d039

[:|]

 

[/quote]So you''d be impartial and take this view say if Lincoln were bossing a game, were 1-0 up, just about to gain promotion and someone went through, dived, got a pen, and cost Lincoln promotion?  Come off it.

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...