Ref Watch City Games - 2023/24

supercity88 said:
You don't half worry about the ref! This could be the 4th title in a row, they've done a shit job of fucking us over so far, relax! The last two were corrupt as fuck and yet we got penalties in both and generally the games were devoid of controversy. A couple of fouls here and there we might have got, that's always going to be arguable.

He's only overseen 7 games (6 in the league). We've won 5 and lost 2.

The two we've lost - Brentford away last season and Villa away this season. Nothing to see there.

Be happy it's someone obscure, it means they're expecting a procession and have put the big guns elsewhere where they feel more is at stake.

At least I hope!
Click to expand...

Quite - 2 defeats, one we weren't bothered about as there were bigger fish to dry, and one when Villa could have had more than 1.
 
blue b4 the moon said:
Not sure what to make of Brookes for this game, I'd have expected a more high profile appointment.

Have the powers given up on stopping us in the league or is he low level enough to be a patsy?

There's definitely no paranoia at blueb4themoon towers. ;)
Click to expand...
Had him recently in the 5-1 win v Luton. Plus both wins v Everton and the loss at Villa.
See Dipper Chris Kavanagh has got the Dippers game to ensure all goes well for Klopps final game
 
hertsblue said:
Had him recently in the 5-1 win v Luton. Plus both wins v Everton and the loss at Villa.
See Dipper Chris Kavanagh has got the Dippers game to ensure all goes well for Klopps final game
Click to expand...

Whoever the ref is at Liverpool will be irrelevant - Liverpool have most points at home this season, Wolves have lost half their away games.
 
Just listened to Shay Given saying he thought Romero's challenge on Ederson was a straight red. At the time I thought the same, the pundits and commentators were all saying it was 50/50 and that he was entitled to go for it. Which is true to an extent , but just because you can go for a ball doesn't mean you can do it recklessly and endanger an opponent. Which is clearly what happened.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
Just listened to Shay Given saying he thought Romero's challenge on Ederson was a straight red. At the time I thought the same, the pundits and commentators were all saying it was 50/50 and that he was entitled to go for it. Which is true to an extent , but just because you can go for a ball doesn't mean you can do it recklessly and endanger an opponent. Which is clearly what happened.
Click to expand...
And Romero has history for being a dirty player, he knew what he was doing.
 
John Brook. is a useless ****, but useless towards both teams rather than bias.

we will get fuck all off him but neither will the hammers
 
Thoughts on the PGMOL giving Arsenal an extra goal against the rules of the game, just to make sure it was close? As much a handball as West Ham's would-be 2nd goal.
 
What I am struggling to understand is this.

As soon as the WHAM second went in, the comment was "there's no way that can be allowed, clear handball"

Then "that's something off a beach volleyball court"

My question is then, how shot can a Ref be if he gives a "goal" but every other fucker watching understands it isn't?

Ahh well 119 now, bribing VAR.....
 
I thought the ref was OK today - but then he misses West Ham scoring with an arm. It is the sort of basic situation that he will have seen and given all the way through the league system before arriving in the PL - but now he waits for VAR to tell him. It's not good enough and might have been crucial - if we want referees to get decisions right but don't like VAR we need a better system.

Watching Aussie Rules on Saturday and noted that they have four field umpires triangulating their view of everything - it's a fast, physical game played over a bigger playing area - so it means there is always an umpire with the play and (as far as I can tell) they can all make a decision about foul play etc. Football wouldn't need four - but if it is too fast paced for one person to handle perhaps they need to use "assistant" referees in a different way - especially if semi-automatic offside technology is implemented.
 
Don Karleone said:



First is debatable, and the second is a nailed-on pen.
Click to expand...

Shoving in the back is debatable? I've seen a cheating Egyptian fall forward after feeling a hand on his shoulder, and that was given. Shoving in the back mid-jump is always a penalty to an uncorrupted referee. Howard Webb is back winning trophies for the rags yet again.
 
Dethred said:
Shoving in the back is debatable? I've seen a cheating Egyptian fall forward after feeling a hand on his shoulder, and that was given. Shoving in the back mid-jump is always a penalty to an uncorrupted referee. Howard Webb is back winning trophies for the rags yet again.
Click to expand...


I agree but I can see why people might say it isn't a pen. Both are for me.
 
Don Karleone said:
I agree but I can see why people might say it isn't a pen. Both are for me.
Click to expand...
The only way I can see why someone would think it's not a penalty is if they don't know the rules of the game, or they're rags. 100% of the time that's called a penalty by the ref on the pitch if it's John Stones fouling Rashford in the exact same way.
 
Don Karleone said:



First is debatable, and the second is a nailed-on pen.
Click to expand...

Compare and contrast those two blatant fouls inside the area with a ball simply brushing a player's fingertip as it flies past him as he attempts to block a shot. Clear and obvious.

I'm convinced that they dismissed the one in the first couple of minutes because Martinez fouled after not making an attempt to play the ball so it would've also warranted a red card as well as a penalty.
Madley and VAR shit their knickers and simply chose to ignore it instead as they didn't want to "spoil the occasion".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top