Cappsy 0 Posted September 8, 2011 the game is on sky which means there will be more in-depth coverage/analysis of any big calls the referee makes. so if we are hard done by (AGAIN) with any decisions then at least we have some top pundits noticing this and hopefully fighting our cause. just a thought. although i hope the referee Mark Halsey has a good game as i certainly rate him as one of the better referees... well done to the man on his fight against disease also Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CDMullins 436 Posted September 8, 2011 Apart from Barnett, we havnt been ''hard done by''. Both the Wiagn and Chelsea incidents should have been penalties! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CDMullins 436 Posted September 8, 2011 "Apart from Barnett" ??????Ruddy, cleary brought Ramieres down, had Ramieries had got round him he had a open net, if that isnt a ''clear goal scoring opportunity'' then what is? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bury Yellow 2 Posted September 8, 2011 Funny that CDM. Most pundits did not see it your way. Penalty(s) given that were most certainly not clear cut compounded with sending offs which were at the very least debatable.Still why let a reasonable assessment spoil a feeling of superiority eh? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CDMullins 436 Posted September 8, 2011 Take off the Yellow tinted spectacles.Regardless of whether Ramieres was already going down, or whether Di Santo went down early, both Ruddy and De Leat made contact.Only a Norwich fan would think they wernt penalites!Had both them challenges been on Holt, would you have been crying for a penalty.............of course you would! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crabbycanary 2 Posted September 8, 2011 [quote user="CDMullins"]"Apart from Barnett" ??????Ruddy, cleary brought Ramieres down, had Ramieries had got round him he had a open net, if that isnt a ''clear goal scoring opportunity'' then what is?[/quote]No he wouldn''t have, Pilkington was in the six yard box:( Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cappsy 0 Posted September 8, 2011 who said i claimed they weren''t fouls? bee more specific CDMullins. I''m talking about the red cards. Pilkington was on the line, ramires was going well wide, not just wide; and he''s not known for his lethal finishing so he still would of had a task to score. Ruddy could even of recovered and got back into position as pilkington closed down the over hit ball from ramires. not yellow and green glasses at all. that may seem an unlikely scenario but its not impossible, even if he is brazilian Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CDMullins 436 Posted September 8, 2011 Ah right, so we judge whether it is a goal scoring opportunity by how lethal the fouled player is at finishing?Haha, dont make me laugh Pilkington was on the line. May seem an unlikly scenario? Lets just leave it at that, Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Legend Iwan 30 Posted September 8, 2011 Pilkington was most definitely not on the line. http://www.eplmatches.com/2011/08/27/chelsea-vs-norwich-highlights/Yes, he pushed it wide, but you would always expect it to be put away. Nothing to do with being Brazilian, but a professional football player for one of the best teams'' in the world. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CDMullins 436 Posted September 8, 2011 Wow, someone speaks sense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canary_on_the Trent 0 Posted September 8, 2011 Sack 90% of the paid pundits and get in CDMullins. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CDMullins 436 Posted September 8, 2011 You mean like Mark ''Norwich are doomed'' Lawrenson? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted September 8, 2011 [quote user="CDMullins"]You mean like Mark ''Norwich are doomed'' Lawrenson?[/quote]As opposed to CD "Hoolahan isn''t good enough for the Championship Mullins"? Still, at least Lawrenson has the excuse that he was winding up a member of the production team off-air. What''s yours? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Chops 7 Posted September 8, 2011 The Chelsea penalty was clearly a penalty. I still maintain if it had been Holt fouled by the Chelsea keeper, it would have been a yellow card but meh. Anyway, it was the kind of penalty that is described as "stonewall" for some reason, even though stonewall means "to block or delay". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Graham Humphrey 13 Posted September 8, 2011 I think it''s pretty bloody obvious the De Laet one is outside the box but there we go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Number 9 0 Posted September 8, 2011 Nothing we can do about past games & ref''s decisions.WBA have only scored 2 league goals this season, both by Long, who may not be playing on Sunday!That''s positive for you! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hoolahans Ped 0 Posted September 8, 2011 Are some people STILL moaning about previous refereeing decisions? There''s nothing we can do, the refs gave the decisions, Ruddy will miss West Brom (rightly or wrongly), move on! Jump back into the now, we have two points on the board, look to future games and lets hope we can grab some much needed points, rather than dwelling on the past (and bloody referees). Nuff said. OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cappsy 0 Posted September 8, 2011 I agree with your point but my post is about the next game. the fact that IF there is a huge debateable refereeing decision against us this sunday then it will be highlighted more on sky live than match of the day with (not live) commentary Share this post Link to post Share on other sites