Dortmund (H) - CL QF | Post-Match Thread

[Manchester33]

Don't get me wrong, if it had happened to us I'd be fuming, but does anyone else think that Jude Bellingham's disallowed goal was the correct decision (in the modern game)?

He does get the ball first, but it was a dangerous 'tackle'. Studs showing, stamping motion and clearly makes contact with Ederson. It was one of those that you'd expect to see a foul given if it was on the halfway line. Even if you win the ball,it doesn't give you freedom to stamp on your opponent with your stoods?

I didn't think it was a penalty either, but Can definitely made contact with Rodri's thigh. We've seen penalties given for far less!

 

[BillyShears]

Don't get me wrong, if it had happened to us I'd be fuming, but does anyone else think that Jude Bellingham's disallowed goal was the correct decision (in the modern game)?

He does get the ball first, but it was a dangerous 'tackle'. Studs showing, stamping motion and clearly makes contact with Ederson. It was one of those that you'd expect to see a foul given if it was on the halfway line. Even if you win the ball,it doesn't give you freedom to stamp on your opponent with your stoods?

I didn't think it was a penalty either, but Can definitely made contact with Rodri's thigh. We've seen penalties given for far less!

I more or less said this, but got shouted down by lots of people. For me it was a foul at the time. If you are that high and your follow through catches the player, then that's that. Especially when it's the keeper.

 

[FantasyIreland]

Don't get me wrong, if it had happened to us I'd be fuming, but does anyone else think that Jude Bellingham's disallowed goal was the correct decision (in the modern game)?

He does get the ball first, but it was a dangerous 'tackle'. Studs showing, stamping motion and clearly makes contact with Ederson. It was one of those that you'd expect to see a foul given if it was on the halfway line. Even if you win the ball,it doesn't give you freedom to stamp on your opponent with your stoods?

I didn't think it was a penalty either, but Can definitely made contact with Rodri's thigh. We've seen penalties given for far less!

Bellinghmas goal was a good challenge,it was not dangerous,it was Eddies fuck up and the goal should have stood.

As for the penalty,it was fucking embarrassing seeing one of ours doing what we have slammed Salah and Fernandes for.Had he gone down claiming the thigh contact,then the legitimacy may have carried some weight.

 

[HarrytheBlue]

Don't get me wrong, if it had happened to us I'd be fuming, but does anyone else think that Jude Bellingham's disallowed goal was the correct decision (in the modern game)?

He does get the ball first, but it was a dangerous 'tackle'. Studs showing, stamping motion and clearly makes contact with Ederson. It was one of those that you'd expect to see a foul given if it was on the halfway line. Even if you win the ball,it doesn't give you freedom to stamp on your opponent with your stoods?

I didn't think it was a penalty either, but Can definitely made contact with Rodri's thigh. We've seen penalties given for far less!

Being honest, because the ref blew the whistle immediately, there was no possibility of a VAR review. There should have been a VAR review. Looked like a fair challenge to me. In truth, we should have won 5 - 2 - maybe 5 - 3 at a stretch. But this was our first ever bit of Ch L luck.

 

[Corky]

Don't get me wrong, if it had happened to us I'd be fuming, but does anyone else think that Jude Bellingham's disallowed goal was the correct decision (in the modern game)?

He does get the ball first, but it was a dangerous 'tackle'. Studs showing, stamping motion and clearly makes contact with Ederson. It was one of those that you'd expect to see a foul given if it was on the halfway line. Even if you win the ball,it doesn't give you freedom to stamp on your opponent with your stoods?

I didn't think it was a penalty either, but Can definitely made contact with Rodri's thigh. We've seen penalties given for far less!

Ederson's feet were just as high and the contact is the foul by Ederson who completely misses the ball.

Terrible decision but due one after Lyon's 2nd goal.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Bellinghmas goal was a good challenge,it was not dangerous,it was Eddies fuck up and the goal should have stood.

As for the penalty,it was fucking embarrassing seeing one of ours doing what we have slammed Salah and Fernandes for.Had he gone down claiming the thigh contact,then the legitimacy may have carried some weight.

I’m not sure mate, I think with Rodders that it all happened so quickly, the ricochet of the ball and the contact from the player that when the ball has then hit him in the face he’s not been 100% sure what’s gone on so he’s gone for the holding the face, which you have to do to get the ref’s attention nowadays.

 

[Rammy Blue]

I more or less said this, but got shouted down by lots of people. For me it was a foul at the time. If you are that high and your follow through catches the player, then that's that. Especially when it's the keeper.

It’s a 50/50, I said to my lad I thought his challenge could easily be classed as dangerous, but on balance should probably have been given. Thank fuck the ref blew his whistle as I wouldn’t have fancied var to help us out on that.

 

[johnnytapia]

Don't get me wrong, if it had happened to us I'd be fuming, but does anyone else think that Jude Bellingham's disallowed goal was the correct decision (in the modern game)?

He does get the ball first, but it was a dangerous 'tackle'. Studs showing, stamping motion and clearly makes contact with Ederson. It was one of those that you'd expect to see a foul given if it was on the halfway line. Even if you win the ball,it doesn't give you freedom to stamp on your opponent with your stoods?

I didn't think it was a penalty either, but Can definitely made contact with Rodri's thigh. We've seen penalties given for far less!

When you’ve finished on the crack pipe can I have a toke?

 

[pauls]

I’m not sure mate, I think with Rodders that it all happened so quickly, the ricochet of the ball and the contact from the player that when the ball has then hit him in the face he’s not been 100% sure what’s gone on so he’s gone for the holding the face, which you have to do to get the ref’s attention nowadays.

Yes the BALL hit him in the face and of course the media overlooked this.Some silly woman on a Guardian podcast suggested we're unlikable ! to who ? United/Liverpool/Chelsea/Arsenal/Spurs fans/ 99% of Journos (fanzine writers) - why wouldn't we be ? The general consensus of fans outside these media darlings can see through it. When Arsensal and Chelsea were Stretfords only rival I became a fan, hate the fuckin lot of em now.

 

[FantasyIreland]

I’m not sure mate, I think with Rodders that it all happened so quickly, the ricochet of the ball and the contact from the player that when the ball has then hit him in the face he’s not been 100% sure what’s gone on so he’s gone for the holding the face, which you have to do to get the ref’s attention nowadays.

I think we saw it differently then,as i didnt see the ball hit him in the face,and i really cant offer him a defence or excuse.I thought he had more about him.

As i said though,a penalty would not have been the worst decision as there was contact on his leg and in todays climate they are given for such.It was the face holding that deflected the attention and swayed the ref in my opinion.

Happy to be wrong though.