Watford (H) Post Match Thread

[Decepticon]

Fuck off BT.

The game was affected by the controversial first goal my arse. It was 3-1. The second goal was scored 1 minute later.
Only after the third did Watford change their tactics.

Affecting the result is winning 1-0 by an offside goal.
Or drawing when the opposition score with the hand as Wolves did.

More excuses for Jürgen Flopp.

 

[super_city_si]

Was thinking the very same thing....Ive never heard of PGMOL or any refereeing institution either being consulted or offering a judgement in the middle of the game.

For me Sterling CANT be offside....the defender has touched the ball last and you cannot be offside from when the last touch comes off the opposition...thoug they are saying the ruling says that if a player is making an attempt to play the ball even if the opposition player plays the ball onto you and you have started in an offside position then you are still offside.

All in all, there was only one team that was even trying to play football and win the game. We scored two more goals and even after they scored one they still didn't try to attack. Fortune favours the brave and we fully got what we deserved.

It will really piss the scousers off that its Raheem that keeps us above them

Come on Burnley!

If sterling made no attempt to kick it then it would be a goal but he tried to kick it and therefore becomes active and it’s offside.

 

[BucksBlue]

Take that
FIFA
UEFA
FA
PL
BT
Jake Humphries
snitchers Liverpool

..... and Peter Walton

TAKE IT TAKE IT TAKE IT

 

[rushts]

Fuck them, let the 1st goal be controversial. We won, the score stands... enjoy the media meltdown. I couldn't be happier.

 

[Chi-town blues]

The defender plays the ball against Raz, thus playing him on.

That’s what I thought as well . Correct call .

 

[blueinsa]

Wrong.

Even Walton says thats the law although he then went on to spew some other shite to try and back his original assessment that it should not have stood but had to say the interpretation from the ref is what it is so goal.

I will say this though, im not spending the fucking evening arguing the toss on a City forum about if it was or wasnt a goal or not.

Fill your boots if you feel so strongly about it.

 

[Eaglechief]

Thought it was Aguerro who was offside not Raheem, because the defender deflected the ball off Raheem's leg for the 1st goal.

Overall we deserved the win and Watford got what they deserved for being so negative.

 

[Trojan1962]

Great win, David back to his best man of match for me. Ref 1st half a twat time wasting allowed to continue. Gundogan had a good game. 4 points clear big pressure on scousers tomorrow

 

[simon23]

If sterling made no attempt to kick it then it would be a goal but he tried to kick it and therefore becomes active and it’s offside.

that's how I understood what they are saying.....but its very hard to interpret a players intent to play a ball....

fuck them.....salah has dived his way to the top of the league earlier in the season and no one said a thing.....PGMOL certainly weren't consulted live while the game was going on!

 

[super_city_si]

Even Walton says thats the law although he then went on to spew some other shite to try and back his original assessment that it should not have stood but had to say the interpretation from the ref is what it is so goal.

I will say this though, im not spending the fucking evening arguing the toss on a City forum about if it was or wasnt a goal or not.

Fill your boots if you feel so strongly about it.

Haha im not bothered either. We deserved the win. We can disagree and and that’s fine. The offside law is a farce.