Peter Walton..

The Future’s Blue! said:
Part of my regime so I don’t have to listen to the inane ramblings of United or Liverpool bias idiots.
Click to expand...
"apparently" was the word that highlighted his ignorance, after giving chapter and verse as to why the goal should not have stood. He was told off camera the rules. He proceeded to volte face and completely contradict himself. "Apparently" the goal should have stood, did he then backtrack and admit that he was completely wrong and apologise. Of course not. Everybody makes mistakes but this guy has cornered the market.
It also reveals the trail of buffoonery by the officiating team. The ref on the pitch had a dazed look on his face hoping VAR would step in and make decision for him, or did we need Stockley Park to thumb through the rules to confirm the legality of the goal. My question which part of the clueless team was the final arbiter.
 
Last edited:
I must admit I dont know a lot of the laws regarding Association Football so can I also have a job as an expert on BT Sport ?


(Sadly I do know the offside law though so that will probably go against me)
 
1stFeb1969 said:
You know more than Tyrone Mings then.....

Click to expand...

Ridiculous really. In real time it didn't even occur to me that there was anything wrong with the goal.
No on or offside for a tackle. In fact I bet there are a few occasions where the last defender or goalkeeper has been tackled and a goal scored.
The thing that makes it seem bad is that Rodri times the tackle well, only just after Mings touches the ball
 
Blue Til Death said:
Nobody on BT is paid to offer an unbiased opinion when it comes to City, they are paid to provide the complete cunting opposite and this clown is very good at it...!
Click to expand...
Yes, it seems our media is taking a leaf out of the media in the USA. Pick a side and rinse those people for everything you can. Traditionally lots of rags and dippers to appeal to. The truth is they don't care about either team but are using them as part of their business model to make as much money as they can. I wouldn't take it personally and I wouldn't tune in to watch it either.
 
WestGorton said:
Fuck off Ming's. You are as shit as football as knowing the rules.
Click to expand...
There have been hundreds of goals over the years where a defender miskicks the ball to an attacker in an offside position who puts the ball in the net. Once the defender plays the ball the attacker is onside. Goalkeepers often do this with poor clearances for example. It is 100 per cent a goal. If Rodri had tackled Mings before Rodri played it he would have been offside. It is just another fake narrative to attack City with. Mings is an idiot if he doesn't know the rule.
 
dronefromsector7G said:
Rio the fucking thick twat. Has the rule explained to him then says bad decision by the ref. How is this arse on TV?
Click to expand...
He's still Bitter about the 6-1
a750f7af64cdbf6c4bc838175915d8f4.gif
 
BT trying to rewrite the rules to fit their own narrative.They really showed themselves up last night to be the biased shit broadcaster they are. Contrast their reaction to the United result with Humphrey purring like a sewing machine and the half wit in full ejaculation ecstasy.
 
Bill the Blue said:
This fkin wanker is clueless..

Paid by BT to provide unbiased, refereeing input during games doesn't even know the fkin offside rule yet he's on my TV screen gobbing off that Bernie's goal should have been disallowed..

Fatso Moss and the faceless knobs in the VAR studio thought otherwise though you bent scouse twat..!

Changed his tune in the studio and lost all fkin credibility in the process..!

He can fcuk right off and take that diving, greasy, cheating twat Grealish with him..


Brilliant win given next to no credit for by a bunch of sad bastards at BT!!
Click to expand...
No offence mate, WHAT CREDIBILITY ?

If you called that useless , bent, c**t, a waste of space, you would be being unbelievably kind to him.
Credibility..........NEVER had any!
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
There have been hundreds of goals over the years where a defender miskicks the ball to an attacker in an offside position who puts the ball in the net. Once the defender plays the ball the attacker is onside. Goalkeepers often do this with poor clearances for example. It is 100 per cent a goal. If Rodri had tackled Mings before Rodri played it he would have been offside. It is just another fake narrative to attack City with. Mings is an idiot if he doesn't know the rule.
Click to expand...
Of course he knows the law, he's just putting out a tweet because he's realised that it's now become a "controversial" goal and he want to plead how unfair it all is.
 
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