Ref Watch

[cheekybids]

If Oliver and Coote were under orders to keep things interesting, why the fuck did Coote go to the effort to find an angle showing Whites big toe was playing Stones onside, rather than using the tv angle where Stones looked clearly off and which nobody would’ve questioned…..

It’s a good point & completely inconsistent with the rest of the game.

 

[Bluearmy]

If Oliver and Coote were under orders to keep things interesting, why the fuck did Coote go to the effort to find an angle showing Whites big toe was playing Stones onside, rather than using the tv angle where Stones looked clearly off and which nobody would’ve questioned…..

Before each match, Hawk-Eye calibrates multiple cameras to give many options when showing an offside decision in the event that a body part is covered in one camera.

For the Premier League, five cameras are calibrated: the main wide camera, both 18-yard box cameras and both goalline cameras.

There is only so much a human can interfere, thats the reason the goal was given and Olivier and Coote could not influence it as per the rest of the match

 

[cheekybids]

Unfortunately this is a pile of shit as can clearly be seen here, where Partey has planted all 6 studs into Kev’s ankle/leg…

No idea what planet some people are on

Interesting image of shielding the ball, ffs it always annoys me when a lie is told & you hear it repeated. Prior to that if you’d have asked anyone what they were saw then no-one will have described it as shielding.

 

[Bluearmy]

Interesting image of shielding the ball, ffs it always annoys me when a lie is told & you hear it repeated. Prior to that if you’d have asked anyone what they were saw then no-one will have described it as shielding.

Its times like these you realise some people don’t understand the game at even a basic level…. The fact that some of these people are apparently officials of the game is frankly scary!!

 

[Machiavelli]

Partey isn’t in possession of the ball.

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

Explain pillock

Take it easy. Anything said on here isn't going to change things.
Personally I'm glad we hammered them without any controversy casting a cloud over the result.

 

[Cassandra]

The laws of the game my friend. Love it when people who have never ever read the laws argue with you. If that was at the other end and the ref gave a penalty you would be one of the 1st to scream about it IMO

It is true that some who post on here don’t know what the laws say. it is also true, in my view, to say that whilst referees clearly know the words written in the laws of the game when it comes to applying those laws in practice, nobody knows:
What constitutes handball;
what constitutes offside;
Where the boundaries lie between a fair challenge, a foul challenge, a yellow card challenge and a red card challenge;
What kind of stoppages time should be added on for, or,
How VAR is supposed to work……

 

[Bluearmy]

The laws of the game my friend. Love it when people who have never ever read the laws argue with you. If that was at the other end and the ref gave a penalty you would be one of the 1st to scream about it IMO

Well the refs dont know the laws of the game as they demonstrate week after week after week…….

Its a penalty as is shown below. Id expect it to be given against city no drama, as 6 studs are planted in the ankle which is a clear foul.

 

[Bluearmy]

Take it easy. Anything said on here isn't going to change things.
Personally I'm glad we hammered them without any controversy casting a cloud over the result.

No, but bullshit needs calling out…

Agree, it was a hammering but without the bent officiating it would have been 6 or 7

 

[GaudinoMotors]

Explain pillock

A bit harsh.


Surely you mean, condescending pillock.