Referees/Officials 2017/18 performances

[carlosthejackal]

Sane didn't score so how was he offside?

He deemed him to be in the keepers eye line , that part is all down to opinion, but originally the ref gave the goal

 

[blueinsa]

Bit of a strawman that tbf mate.

Yet its a story that would have made a journalists career if one of them had run with it at a time when it was certainly common knowledge.

It went years without reporting for many reasons but it not being true wasn't one of them and that's my point.

 

[blueinsa]

He deemed him to be in the keepers eye line , that part is all down to opinion, but originally the ref gave the goal

Thats some fucking vision from the sideline then.

Pity he couldn't see a leg breaking tackle?

 

[squirtyflower]

Off the top of my head, our third against Arsenal when Silva was offside?

and since then ther have been several potential leg breakers against us not given, perhaps you'd like to point out similarities for other teams?

Or does the debatable offside Silva goal equal out a line and call for a ball going out noted from forty metres out whilst the ball was ten metres in the air, completely fair assessment that disallowed a goal.

 

[cleavers]

True, but I don’t think he would’ve known either way so he was always going to take his linesman’s word for it. You can only overrule him if you’re certain he was wrong, and I doubt Mason would’ve known that.

I admire your stance here Ric, but no matter what the reasons are, that goal should stand, even if Sane was in an offside position, because under the current rules Sane is entitled to be there, and he made no attempt to go near the ball, and Mason knew that, which was why he originally gave the goal. He wanted a reason not to give it, to keep a big game for the TV broadcasters and sponsors open, so for me he went over to make it look like he'd taken advice. The replays show Sane is not offside anyway, so it should be a goal, and annoyingly one of our best goals of the season will never be counted.

As for the rest of Mason's performance, well you can view it however you want, but at the very best it was incompetent, and if not its something else, which most football fans don't want to believe happens, even though deep down we know it does, as Halsey and Clattenburg have both confirmed recently.

The good thing is now, 90% of the time they can try and stop us with decisions, but we're too good, so rather than let them spoil it for me, I'm going to take every win we get, when clearly there were efforts to stop us winning today as a bigger success, and I'll be sticking the 2 fingers up to it all, and continue to enjoy what we are doing.

When officials with certain known allegiances (Mason and Taylor in particular) are stopped from being involved in games that could involve the team they have an allegiance too, then I will know there is nothing sinister going on, until then I won't.

 

[meltonblue]

He wasn't.

Replay shows he was onside and the keeper had a direct line of sight to Bernado and the shot.

Again, the fact he goes to speak to the lino is the tell here as normally its a free kick and get on with it.

It stinks im afraid.

The replay I saw, he was close enough to the ball to be judged as interfering with play (or at least, it could be viewed as that), he runs directly across the sight line just after the shot is hit.

You can see it on this pic here - https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.sp...llowed-goal-against-cardiff-20180128.amp.html

I thought the bad call was the offside decision in the first place

 

[squirtyflower]

Thats some fucking vision from the sideline then.

Pity he couldn't see a leg breaking tackle?

Regardless of whether he was inline of sight or not, he wasn't offside

 

[carlosthejackal]

Thats some fucking vision from the sideline then.

Pity he couldn't see a leg breaking tackle?

Think the ref decided he was in the keepers eye line

As for the tackle , it was a disgrace and both ref and linesman didn’t do there job

 

[carlosthejackal]

Regardless of whether he was inline of sight or not, he wasn't offside

Correct , but that’s down to the linesman and not the ref

 

[blueinsa]

Think the ref decided he was in the keepers eye line

Must have been after he'd originally given the goal then yes?

I'm not trying to be argumentative her with you mate but what happened today surrounding that goal was complete and utter nonsense form both mason and his linesman.

 

[meltonblue]

It’s only the same call as we got from the linesman against Newcastle though...

I agree that I don’t think the linesman can make it, but it’s something that we have benefitted from in the past too so I just see it as a poor decision rather than anything corrupt

 

[franksinatra]

There's fucking tons of it, and when it's presented you say it's not, you choose to ignore it, that's your right, but like the other troll stop telling others they're wrong for accepting it as it is.

Why are we trolls because we do not view things the same as you?

Its a different viewpoint to yours. Why can we not just debate the topic and cut out the insults.

 

[kevodevo]

I question Mason`s integrity. We don`t like him, and he clearly doesn`t like us. We have outed him, he holds a grudge, and this is his way of getting his own back.
Either that or his just shit. But if that was the case he`d be shit for both teams in the City games he officiates.

Don't give that twunt the complement of a 'grudge' the guy is just absolute shite at his job - he should be stood down permanently- prat of the first order

 

[Ric]

and since then ther have been several potential leg breakers against us not given, perhaps you'd like to point out similarities for other teams?

Or does the debatable offside Silva goal equal out a line and call for a ball going out noted from forty metres out whilst the ball was ten metres in the air, completely fair assessment that disallowed a goal.

You’re also making strawmen here. I’m not comparing the leg breakers you mention with the “Silva goal” [sic], I was merely answering a specific question about decisions that have gone our way.

 

[squirtyflower]

I admire your stance here Ric, but no matter what the reasons are, that goal should stand, even if Sane was in an offside position, because under the current rules Sane is entitled to be there, and he made no attempt to go near the ball, and Mason knew that, which was why he originally gave the goal. He wanted a reason not to give it, to keep a big game for the TV broadcasters and sponsors open, so for me he went over to make it look like he'd taken advice. The replays show Sane is not offside anyway, so it should be a goal, and annoyingly one of our best goals of the season will never be counted.

As for the rest of Mason's performance, well you can view it however you want, but at the very best it was incompetent, and if not its something else, which most football fans don't want to believe happens, even though deep down we know it does, as Halsey and Clattenburg have both confirmed recently.

The good thing is now, 90% of the time they can try and stop us with decisions, but we're too good, so rather than let them spoil it for me, I'm going to take every win we get, when clearly there were efforts to stop us winning today as a bigger success, and I'll be sticking the 2 fingers up to it all, and continue to enjoy what we are doing.

When officials with certain known allegiances (Mason and Taylor in particular) are stopped from being involved in games that could involve the team they have an allegiance too, then I will know there is nothing sinister going on, until then I won't.

Nail on head, the ref and Lino are miked up, there's no reason at all to go over , except to discuss how they could prevent the goal.

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

You’re also making strawmen here. I’m not comparing the leg breakers you mention with the “Silva goal” [sic], I was merely answering a specific question about decisions that have gone our way.

decision ;-)

 

[cleavers]

In fairness to the ref the linesman told him he was offside

Yes he did, but it doesn't matter he had no influence on the goal, and that is the current rule, therefor offside or onside doesn't matter, its a goal.

 

[blueinsa]

Regardless of whether he was inline of sight or not, he wasn't offside

No he wasn't.

We have it was disallowed for offside which it wasnt and we have it was disallowed because he was interfering with play which again he wasn't.

At least they got together to get their stories straight i suppose.........

 

[jimmygrimblesboots]

Must have been at least 4 or 5 leg breaking tackles on our players recently and the refs are doing nothing , it appears when the neanderthals play us it is a free hit , they can just go out and try to maim our players with impunity , not sure how serious Sane's injury was but it was a horrendous tackle and a straight red card all day long , Mason is a c*nt

 

[blueinsa]

I admire your stance here Ric, but no matter what the reasons are, that goal should stand, even if Sane was in an offside position, because under the current rules Sane is entitled to be there, and he made no attempt to go near the ball, and Mason knew that, which was why he originally gave the goal. He wanted a reason not to give it, to keep a big game for the TV broadcasters and sponsors open, so for me he went over to make it look like he'd taken advice. The replays show Sane is not offside anyway, so it should be a goal, and annoyingly one of our best goals of the season will never be counted.

As for the rest of Mason's performance, well you can view it however you want, but at the very best it was incompetent, and if not its something else, which most football fans don't want to believe happens, even though deep down we know it does, as Halsey and Clattenburg have both confirmed recently.

The good thing is now, 90% of the time they can try and stop us with decisions, but we're too good, so rather than let them spoil it for me, I'm going to take every win we get, when clearly there were efforts to stop us winning today as a bigger success, and I'll be sticking the 2 fingers up to it all, and continue to enjoy what we are doing.

When officials with certain known allegiances (Mason and Taylor in particular) are stopped from being involved in games that could involve the team they have an allegiance too, then I will know there is nothing sinister going on, until then I won't.

Well said mate.