What Marriner said about that second goal...

[First Wazzock 1,014]

According to the article League safety secured for Norwich City, says Grant Holt

“Surely you must be able to see the lad is lying on the ball with two legs, sitting on it,” said Holt. “If he wants our players to go and start kicking him on the floor, which they wouldn’t do, then that’s fair enough. But he said he didn’t see it and he apologised for getting in the way so...

If he really didn''t see it while standing a couple away he should not be reffing, simple as.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

With a name like Marriner I guess we should have known what to expect. No matter how many arse it has.

 

 

[militantcanary 0]

This is most curious because the referee made the sign which is commonly equates to having played the ball and then allowed the game to continue.

Of course if the referee gets in the way that he can''t pull play back and so seems to have apologised for this, as Paul Lambert says 9/10 times lying on the ball equates to obstruction

[The Gruffalo 0]

Stop whining.I see nobody mentions that it was a foul to bring the Everton player down prior to any obstruction. Everton players did not stand about complaining that the free kick was not awarded to them. Instead they got on with the game while 4 or 5 of our players stood and watched the build up to their 2nd goal. A basic error that Lambert and Culverhouse should drill in to them prior to tomorrows game at White Hart Lane. Do they not teach footballers to play to the whistle in Primary School anymore?

[Duncan Edwards 0]

So you agree that the game should have been halted, but in your opinion prior to the obstruction. If it was a foul and he played advantage (unlikely given that he was on the floor) then when he obstructed play as a direct result of the original infringement then play should have been brought back and the free kick given.

As for footballers being taught in Primary school, I''m sure there are a few that would benefit..

[ChrisEllis 0]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]Stop whining.I see nobody mentions that it was a foul to bring the Everton player down prior to any obstruction. Everton players did not stand about complaining that the free kick was not awarded to them. Instead they got on with the game while 4 or 5 of our players stood and watched the build up to their 2nd goal. A basic error that Lambert and Culverhouse should drill in to them prior to tomorrows game at White Hart Lane. Do they not teach footballers to play to the whistle in Primary School anymore?[/quote]Gruffalo, of course every player learns to play to the whistle in Primary School, just as every player learns not to step in and start whacking at the ball when an opposing player is laying all over it. So what exactly were the Norwich City players supposed to do for the 3 seconds while the Everton player was obstructing the ball, if not stand around and wait for play to continue and legitimately expect an foul to be called for obstruction or interference? So it''s not about playing to the whistle. It''s about Everton having a clear advantage of catching Norwich in a moment where they were made to stand still and clearly unable to make a play on the ball. Stop making excuses for poor referring. Clearly the ref yesterday demonstrated that he should at best, be reffing in Primary School.

[The Gruffalo 0]

[quote user="Duncan Edwards"]So you agree that the game should have been halted, but in your opinion prior to the obstruction. If it was a foul and he played advantage (unlikely given that he was on the floor) then when he obstructed play as a direct result of the original infringement then play should have been brought back and the free kick given.

As for footballers being taught in Primary school, I''m sure there are a few that would benefit..[/quote]Yes that is correct, the ref got two decisions wrong there. Firstly Everton should have been awarded a free kick then we should have been awarded one just after that as the player we had brought down obstructed the ball.Everton players played to the whistle while 4 or 5 of our players didn''t though. A shame as it was a good performance by the team yesterday and we were unlucky not to get 3 points. We really did not help ourselves though with the lapse in concentration by numerous players during this incident.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"][quote user="Duncan Edwards"]So you agree that the game should have been halted, but in your opinion prior to the obstruction. If it was a foul and he played advantage (unlikely given that he was on the floor) then when he obstructed play as a direct result of the original infringement then play should have been brought back and the free kick given. As for footballers being taught in Primary school, I''m sure there are a few that would benefit..[/quote]

Yes that is correct, the ref got two decisions wrong there. Firstly Everton should have been awarded a free kick then we should have been awarded one just after that as the player we had brought down obstructed the ball.

Everton players played to the whistle while 4 or 5 of our players didn''t though. A shame as it was a good performance by the team yesterday and we were unlucky not to get 3 points. We really did not help ourselves though with the lapse in concentration by numerous players during this incident.
[/quote]

 

Which ones?

[The Gruffalo 0]

[quote user="ChrisEllis"][quote user="The Gruffalo"]Stop whining.I see nobody mentions that it was a foul to bring the Everton player down prior to any obstruction. Everton players did not stand about complaining that the free kick was not awarded to them. Instead they got on with the game while 4 or 5 of our players stood and watched the build up to their 2nd goal. A basic error that Lambert and Culverhouse should drill in to them prior to tomorrows game at White Hart Lane. Do they not teach footballers to play to the whistle in Primary School anymore?[/quote]Gruffalo, of course every player learns to play to the whistle in Primary School, just as every player learns not to step in and start whacking at the ball when an opposing player is laying all over it. So what exactly were the Norwich City players supposed to do for the 3 seconds while the Everton player was obstructing the ball, if not stand around and wait for play to continue and legitimately expect an foul to be called for obstruction or interference? So it''s not about playing to the whistle. It''s about Everton having a clear advantage of catching Norwich in a moment where they were made to stand still and clearly unable to make a play on the ball. Stop making excuses for poor referring. Clearly the ref yesterday demonstrated that he should at best, be reffing in Primary School.

[/quote]Our players stood around waiting for far longer than that though. They waited until the ball had been fed back to Fellani and he had then put another Everton player through on the left before the 4 or 5 NCFC players who were ball watching woke up.I think it is those of you who are blaming the ref who are making excuses.Like I say, none of you have given a fair analysis of the situation and explained that two of our players actually brought the Everton player down who was obstructing the ball in the first place.

[The Gruffalo 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"][quote user="Duncan Edwards"]So you agree that the game should have been halted, but in your opinion prior to the obstruction. If it was a foul and he played advantage (unlikely given that he was on the floor) then when he obstructed play as a direct result of the original infringement then play should have been brought back and the free kick given. As for footballers being taught in Primary school, I''m sure there are a few that would benefit..[/quote]Yes that is correct, the ref got two decisions wrong there. Firstly Everton should have been awarded a free kick then we should have been awarded one just after that as the player we had brought down obstructed the ball.Everton players played to the whistle while 4 or 5 of our players didn''t though. A shame as it was a good performance by the team yesterday and we were unlucky not to get 3 points. We really did not help ourselves though with the lapse in concentration by numerous players during this incident.[/quote]

 

Which ones?

[/quote]You have access to view the goal again don''t you?I should imagine it was Howson, Fox, Hoolahan, Russell Martin (Possibly Elliott Bennett from the area of the pitch that it broke down in and the time and space that Everton were given on the ball once it was fed back to Fellani.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

I''ll look at it again later. But to be fair it''s difficult to talk to you about anything on here. Your answer is always to send me to look something up for you.   Now then Guff, whilst I do that, maybe you could tell me about this in depth analysis you get from Hanson and Lawrenson that I don''t seem to get on my tv.

 

 

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="ChrisEllis"][quote user="The Gruffalo"]Stop whining.

I see nobody mentions that it was a foul to bring the Everton player down prior to any obstruction. Everton players did not stand about complaining that the free kick was not awarded to them. Instead they got on with the game while 4 or 5 of our players stood and watched the build up to their 2nd goal. A basic error that Lambert and Culverhouse should drill in to them prior to tomorrows game at White Hart Lane. Do they not teach footballers to play to the whistle in Primary School anymore?
[/quote]

Gruffalo, of course every player learns to play to the whistle in Primary School, just as every player learns not to step in and start whacking at the ball when an opposing player is laying all over it. So what exactly were the Norwich City players supposed to do for the 3 seconds while the Everton player was obstructing the ball, if not stand around and wait for play to continue and legitimately expect an foul to be called for obstruction or interference?

So it''s not about playing to the whistle. It''s about Everton having a clear advantage of catching Norwich in a moment where they were made to stand still and clearly unable to make a play on the ball.

Stop making excuses for poor referring. Clearly the ref yesterday demonstrated that he should at best, be reffing in Primary School.



[/quote]

I think that is exactly what they should have done

[Harry 0]

For your info Gruffabinner Hoolahan didn''t stand around, he went for the ball and was obstructed by Marriner.

[The Gruffalo 0]

For those who do not like the analysis of Lawro and Hansen the answer is simple, do not continue tuning in to watch them.It is quite easy to ignore people that you do not like if you really try.

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]
It is quite easy to ignore people that you do not like if you really try.
[/quote]

Just such a shame that you cannot master the art of doing so.[;)]

 

 

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]

You have access to view the goal again don''t you?

I should imagine it was Howson, Fox, Hoolahan, Russell Martin (Possibly Elliott Bennett from the area of the pitch that it broke down in and the time and space that Everton were given on the ball once it was fed back to Fellani.
[/quote]

The player involved in the foul you alledge was in fact Surman.

[The Gruffalo 0]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]It is quite easy to ignore people that you do not like if you really try.[/quote]

Just such a shame that you cannot master the art of doing so.[;)]

 

 

[/quote]Touche! Do you watch Lawro and Hansen too and if so what do you think of them?

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]For those who do not like the analysis of Lawro and Hansen the answer is simple, do not continue tuning in to watch them.

It is quite easy to ignore people that you do not like if you really try.
[/quote]

 

Let''s just try again Guff. You said you enjoyed the "in depth analysis of other games" on MOTD. All I ever see is an opinion on the main talking points of the day and very little analysis of  which none is "in depth". Just to show that I obviously receive the dumbed down version could you give me an example of that "in depth analysis ".

 

 

 

[The Gruffalo 0]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]You have access to view the goal again don''t you?I should imagine it was Howson, Fox, Hoolahan, Russell Martin (Possibly Elliott Bennett from the area of the pitch that it broke down in and the time and space that Everton were given on the ball once it was fed back to Fellani.[/quote]

The player involved in the foul you alledge was in fact Surman.

[/quote]Where am I talking about who committed the foul against the Everton player? Do put your specs on and look again. I was talking about players who stood and watched as Everton played on to the Whistle and set up their 2nd goal.I dare say that you were not good enough to play for your Primary School team.

[The Gruffalo 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]For those who do not like the analysis of Lawro and Hansen the answer is simple, do not continue tuning in to watch them.It is quite easy to ignore people that you do not like if you really try.[/quote]

 

Let''s just try again Guff. You said you enjoyed the "in depth analysis of other games" on MOTD. All I ever see is an opinion on the main talking points of the day and very little analysis of  which none is "in depth". Just to show that I obviously receive the dumbed down version could you give me an example of that "in depth analysis ".

 

 

 

[/quote]Stop watching motd if you don''t like it and it''s presenters.Controlfreakalitis!

[nutty nigel 7,902]

So you''re saying that what YOU watch is "in depth analysis"?

 

And I''m guessing you watch what I watch and mine isn''t dumbed down.

 

And I''m thinking "why doesn''t that surprise me".

 

 

[The Gruffalo 0]

Controlfreakalitis!

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]

I see nobody mentions that it was a foul to bring the Everton player down prior to any obstruction.
Like I say, none of you have given a fair analysis of the situation and explained that two of our players actually brought the Everton player down who was obstructing the ball in the first place.
[/quote]

Does this help Duffalo? Surman was the initial player involved in the incident.

 

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Looks like everybody''s wised up to you guff. You''re a bit of a fake aren''t you buddy?

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="The Gruffalo"]Yes another brainwashed dude, friend of yours and creator of the truly awful INCSC website.

Controlfreakery!
[/quote]

Wrong Duffalo oh so wrong.

[Shack Attack 0]

Probably pointless getting involved in this thread now but here''s my opinion for what it''s worth. Pienaar wasn''t on the floor for a huge amount of time so I think the decision could have gone either way. If he was laying flat on the ball and making no attempt to get up then I think the referee has no choice but to give a free kick for obstruction but as he is trying to get up I haven''t got a problem with him waving play on. There is fair amount of time between the incident and Jelavic scoring for us to regroup and defend so I think it is wrong to blame the referee for us conceding a goal. We had plenty of time to cut out the threat.

[First Wazzock 1,014]

[quote user="First Wazzock AKA Dr Vinyl"]

According to the article League safety secured for Norwich City, says Grant Holt

“Surely you must be able to see the lad is lying on the ball with two legs, sitting on it,” said Holt. “If he wants our players to go and start kicking him on the floor, which they wouldn’t do, then that’s fair enough. But he said he didn’t see it and he apologised for getting in the way so...

 

If he really didn''t see it while standing a couple away he should not be reffing, simple as.

[/quote]

I really find this hard to believe and a he stood a few yards away looking at the incident. The key point for me is what would he have done had he seen it? Perhaps he could tell us after watching a replay of the incident.

[Harry 0]

Just for your information Gruffabinner I may have met Tilly on a couple of occasions but I can assure you that we aren''t exactly friends and we have no contact with each other apart from a quick hello if we bump into each other at a game or INCSC event, as for the INCSC website I had nothing to with setting it up or running it, I have on a few occasions edited photographs or done some graphics for it but that''s as far as it goes so please get your facts right before posting things about me.

[The Gruffalo 0]

It is clear to see that his controlfreakery has rubbed off on you though Harry.. As for getting facts straight, touche!