Schalke post match thread

wattle said:
He’s also very very good/useful at times. Never moans at being 3rd choice. Be careful what you wish for - we won’t get a better reserve center back
Click to expand...
Otamendi isn't up to the job I agree. Hope we don't look for another centre half this summer.
 
SWPISHOME said:
There's no debate that it hit is arm, Do you honestly think he done it deliberately? He pulled his arm away from the strike.

If he put his arm towards the ball going goal bound then yes fair enough point to the penalty spot.

That decision tonight was b*llshit.
Click to expand...
No he didn’t deliberately do the hand ball but his arm stopped a clear shot on goal. Shouldn’t have been a yellow.
 
Neville Kneville said:
Not according to Peter Walton.

Not interfering with play.

Makes you wonder why Ederson bothered coming for the ball, or Fernandinho holding.
Click to expand...
Wasn't surprised to listen to his comments, He always hated us. Both players were offside, Both made runs towards attacking the ball and as you said hence the reason Ederson came out and why Ferny made a rash foul. But hey what do we know...
 
Len Rum said:
Maybe, difference being we wouldn't have got it, nor the minimal challenge by Fern for the second 'penalty', nor the minimal/non challenge by Ota for the sending off.
Get real and smell the coffee.
Click to expand...
Agree with you about the second one and the sending off.
 
carlosthejackal said:
Thought both pens were justifiable, great spirit in the second half
Click to expand...
That is true. They are not both offences which you could see why a ref would give them, but on VAR where they have time to review, I don't see how Ota demonstrates intent when he's moving his arm behind his back and that's where his arm finishes up.

I get your point though. They are not outrageous. They are open to interpretation. It's always City though who seem to lose these decisions, or it feels that way
 
Anyone arguing that the Nico pen is a cast iron pen is being deliberately obtuse (ignoring all the arguments made here, made by any number of pros who know a thing or two about these things, the celebrity refs, and so on). It's fair enough to argue that a penalty should be given, but it's just plain stupid to suggest that the decision is not debatable. We are in the greyest of grey areas when you start talking about tightened fists, making yourself large, etc.

Whatever you think about the Nico pen, you cannot deny that the decision is hugely subjective. And as so many have pointed out, VAR is not required for these decisions. Fine to have an opinion, but to be so dogmatic about it is just plain immature. I think all the adults in the room know that.
 
kevin horlocks wand said:
Just back to my hotel and I have to say the city fans were not on it tonight. Very weird great result germans were hospitable as always

But ffs city sing
Click to expand...
We 'were' the 12th men - well at least I was singing my tits off in the pub. I couldn't make it to the game tonight, but I still wore my lucky socks!
 
Marvin said:
That is true. They are not both offences which you could see why a ref would give them, but on VAR where they have time to review, I don't see how Ota demonstrates intent when he's moving his arm behind his back and that's where his arm finishes up.

I get your point though. They are not outrageous. They are open to interpretation. It's always City though who seem to lose these decisions, or it feels that way
Click to expand...
Correct, not outrageous, the handball rule is ambiguous and I doubt anybody truly understands it , the second is basic defending, as soon as you are on the wrong side as a defender you are in trouble
 
jimmygrimblesboots said:
If the player isnt interfering with play , how did he win a penalty ?
Click to expand...
You’re not offside unless you touch the ball or directly affect the opposing player from getting the ball how he intends by interfering with that player. By the laws he wasn’t offside
 
Marvin said:
That is true. They are not both offences which you could see why a ref would give them, but on VAR where they have time to review, I don't see how Ota demonstrates intent when he's moving his arm behind his back and that's where his arm finishes up.

I get your point though. They are not outrageous. They are open to interpretation. It's always City though who seem to lose these decisions, or it feels that way
Click to expand...
We have had some decisions go our way as well over last couple of years
 
SWPISHOME said:
Wasn't surprised to listen to his comments, He always hated us. Both players were offside, Both made runs towards attacking the ball and as you said hence the reason Ederson came out and why Ferny made a rash foul. But hey what do we know...
Click to expand...

If you recorded the pundits every instant like this, especially ex refs, you would be able to.playback the same bloke, giving the exact opposite reasons for a decision being right or wrong, 100 times in a season.

They are shite & they are biased. And they have just been given the tools to run the whole show.
 
Marvin said:
That is true. They are not both offences which you could see why a ref would give them, but on VAR where they have time to review, I don't see how Ota demonstrates intent when he's moving his arm behind his back and that's where his arm finishes up.

I get your point though. They are not outrageous. They are open to interpretation. It's always City though who seem to lose these decisions, or it feels that way
Click to expand...

Chance of both those decisions going against us - 90%
Chance of both those decisions going for us - 10%
Chance of us getting both those decisions going for us AND an opposition player getting sent off for a bang average foul ……………...
 
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