Thanks for sharing that. It was an amazing passage of football that had me and the boy completely mesmerised, even among all the shouts from the moany "experts" that sit around me to "get rid". So glad it ended in a goal, if any passgae of football deserves a goal that was it.
Media discussion - 2025/26
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
Thanks for sharing that. It was an amazing passage of football that had me and the boy completely mesmerised, even among all the shouts from the moany "experts" that sit around me to "get rid". So glad it ended in a goal, if any passgae of football deserves a goal that was it.
Exeter Blue I am here
Well-Known Member
What that camera angle doesn't show is that Bernie ducked 'in case' Stones' header came in his direction, rather than 'because' it came in his direction, which is what Robertson was doing. Using an image taken down the pitch rather than from the side, it becomes clear that Bernardo is 3 yards to the side of both Stones and the Wolves' keeper.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't have disallowed Van Dykes' goal yesterday, because Donnarumma was neither unsighted nor distracted by Robertson. He just had his weight going through the wrong foot and was late diving for it due to having to readjust accordingly. However, that's not what it says in the rules, which was why it was disallowed. The other argument about Stones' goal is that Bernie fouled the keeper, which is of course complete cobblers. Literally every goalie at every corner gets baulked and bumped before the ball comes in and you would have 10 penalties a game if you awarded them on that basis.
In short......
Stones = perfectly good goal
Van Dyke = correctly disallowed (although personally I'd have given it)
My heart bleeds for Liverpool though. I mean it's not like those plucky underdogs have ever benefited from a bogus decision against us, is it? Leroy Sane disallowed goal in the CL, Milner no second yellow, Foden no penalty at Anfield, no handball by Alexander-Arnold in their area and they break away and score, etc etc.......
Last edited:
surprisedbygrass
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2024
- Messages
- 609
- Team supported
- Manchester City
I particularly liked the strength O'Reilly showed and the skill of Foden in the corner .They humiliated the Liverpool players. Oh and VVD not having a clue at left back . He scuttled back to the centre as soon as he could leaving Robertson to try and cover the cross.
A young midfielder on our team playing left back while he can and only ever has done the one job . Total Football .
I do enjoy watching them both get beat
In fact the last three games have been excellent to watch - Bournemouth, Dortmund & yesterday's.
Also at Wolves Kavanagh was the on field ref i think and ruled it out at the time, it was var who intervened.
Last edited:
citymad
Well-Known Member
Agreed three tricky fixtures and we came through all of them. Also, great to see we can beat one of the big title contenders. Would've been two if it wasnt a last minute mix up at Stokenal.
This offside issue seems more like a problem of their own making.
After the wolves game, people were outraged, said it should be disallowed.
So the next time it's happened, they've disallowed it.
But now they say that it should be allowed.
Weird that, innit?
After the wolves game, people were outraged, said it should be disallowed.
So the next time it's happened, they've disallowed it.
But now they say that it should be allowed.
Weird that, innit?
It was complete and utter bullshit.
Wish people would stop believing shit they read online that is deliberately and specifically made to get them angry!!
If that's what he's said it proves he either never watches our games or knows absolutely nothing about football, or both. Probably both. He should stick to what he's good at, running a football club....oh what a minute...
Big mals fedora
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 May 2013
- Messages
- 898
Superb. Cheers JC. Why are the media not making more of this?? That was outstanding. ( before anyone replies, i know why???!!!!)
Your last paragraph is, for me, the salient one-there isn't a club on the planet that hasn't benefited from some decisions and been negatively affected by others. Yet a lot of the fans of those same clubs will swear blind that the game is corrupt against them and only them.
So what you’re saying is that we’ve shared 16 goals difference between us…
superwatsonwatson
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 740
I posted the picture purely for clarity. John Stones goal requires little or no justification as far as I’m concerned, but if you want it here it is.
northendenton
Well-Known Member
Well it should be they done nothing wrong # nevertoblame.com
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
The Wolves one was very different. Firstly Bernie was moving away from the keeper and the ball was going into the top corner well over his head. Robertson was standing a yard from the keeper to deliberately block him. If he hadn't have ducked his head the ball would have struck him. Blatantly 100 pc off side.
Well it's good to know the game isn't corrupt and referees make correct decisions based on the laws of the game, this news will probably reduce Bluemoon content by about 70% ;)
Stoned Rose
Well-Known Member
These last 3 games have shown us we’re on the right track.
We will only improve from here. Might put one of our mad runs together.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
I have always been sure that there is no conspiracy among UK referees. Over the years there have probably been a few bent decisions but mostly they are just incompetent and inconsistent. I think the media bias is mostly commercially driven ie negative City stories get a large audience because of the huge fanbases at LFC and MUFC. But I think there is a significant difference between the Bernardo incident and Robertson. I think Robertson was slow to react. His job was initially to block Donna but he should have moved out of the way quickly as most of his teammates did. Arsenal do this at every corner but are quick to get back out.