Il più migliore di San Maranese giocatore di tutti i tempi?


  • Total voters
    10

Remove this Banner Ad

The shitfights are getting tiresome tbh - from all angles. While I may be a pedant at times and flog a dead horse at others, I don't think I do it all that often.

It's starting to become a weekly occurrence, these mud slinging matches. Involves a lot of the same people too.
True buddy, but you have to draw the line at condescending **** knuckles trying to give you history lessons on your own club.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Well, I knew it was coming, though I didn't expect it to be on those penalty calls, or lack of them.

Interesting that table, just saw the true source, which is from Team Talk. Five people panel deciding amongst themselves if a decision is correct or not. Some of those are a bit... interesting to say in the least. Like the free kick decision that led to Okazaki's goal against Newcastle. That's put as decision for us. Now remembering that the free kick was 45 out, and it took a rebound off a Newcastle defender after being put back into the box for Vardy to make the assist... at what point do you honestly draw the line? It's not like he did a Payet, that was more due to poor Newcastle defending than a ref decision going our way.

Even then, it's not like we're storming it, Tottenham and City are right there as well.

I mean, yeah, it's good to get the rub of the green, even the best teams have a little luck in their favour (but sometimes you make your own). I remember that Liverpool game where Morgan's head was considered a hand, and that Van Dijk offside. Swings and roundabouts.


As for my opinion for the penalties, what PendlePie said sums up my thoughts. Though I was a more cringe about Huth than I was for Simpson. Simpson I felt was good, it came off Kasper and into him. Huth... I think SM sums it up by suggesting distance is probably the major reason, that and the fact that Austin and the others chose not to persist with it. Huth was more noteworthy than Simpson in my opinion. The context surrounding Simpson would make it very harsh.

I think giving both of them would be harsh, but as noted, I've seen them given for less, and some not for more. They weren't stonewall, and I think it was in the discretion of the ref to make his choice based on what he has seen. Thankfully, no further action was taken. (Then again, if the Simpson one was given, if Mane was taking it, he was going to miss anyway. How the hell did he not score?!)


This is why you've got to score more than 1-0, things like this can and will bite really hard. I still have visions of Villa.


Though that said, this really should've been booked, how disgusting:


Not really, that was funny. You're doing good Vards, you'll get your chance to make it to 20.
 
Last edited:
The shitfights are getting tiresome tbh - from all angles. While I may be a pedant at times and flog a dead horse at others, I don't think I do it all that often.

It's starting to become a weekly occurrence, these mud slinging matches. Involves a lot of the same people too.

Sad to see, I think they can learn a lot from the way us 2 go about it
 
Well that was pretty good. We should have won really. Sturridge and Lallana should really score. Kane's goal was very good though, shame Lovren over committed, he was only ever gonna turn back inside.

Nice to put a dent in Spurs title push and help Leicester get ever closer.
 
Though that said, this really should've been booked, how disgusting:
But Vardy said last season against us that diving was part of the game and its just football.

Play on I say you cant dive and say its part of the game to justify cheating and then make fun of someone else for diving.
 
Even then, it's not like we're storming it, Tottenham and City are right there as well.

This year is the worst I can ever remember with decisions going against us. I just don't believe that table is anywhere near accurate.

Maybe have to have a closer look at what they've claimed is a correct and incorrect decision.
 
That was last season.
I know. It was that decision that pretty much made me think we were truly cursed at the time. It's not Liverpool's fault.

But yeah, things just weren't going our way at all last season. When it rains, it pours. Then again, lack of quality in the final third and tactics didn't help.

This year is the worst I can ever remember with decisions going against us. I just don't believe that table is anywhere near accurate.

Maybe have to have a closer look at what they've claimed is a correct and incorrect decision.

Alright, be my guest:
http://www.teamtalk.com/

Search Ref Reviews, go through all.... umm 10 weeks. See if you can access your match footage, and see how that goes. At least they were kind enough to go through everything like that. Then again, it is TeamTalk.




Oh, speaking of which, Week 32 right here: http://www.teamtalk.com/news/ref-review-the-incorrect-decisions-from-week-32

Point of interest: The Two Penalty Appeals for Southampton. Verdict: Both decisions are correct.

Ergo: According to that table that DBAH0 provided , Southampton didn't suffer and Leicester didn't benefit from an incorrect decision. Both were, to the letter of the law, not a penalty in either case according to the panel.
 
Well, I knew it was coming, though I didn't expect it to be on those penalty calls, or lack of them.

Interesting that table, just saw the true source, which is from Team Talk. Five people panel deciding amongst themselves if a decision is correct or not. Some of those are a bit... interesting to say in the least. Like the free kick decision that led to Okazaki's goal against Newcastle. That's put as decision for us. Now remembering that the free kick was 45 out, and it took a rebound off a Newcastle defender after being put back into the box for Vardy to make the assist... at what point do you honestly draw the line? It's not like he did a Payet, that was more due to poor Newcastle defending than a ref decision going our way.

Even then, it's not like we're storming it, Tottenham and City are right there as well.

I mean, yeah, it's good to get the rub of the green, even the best teams have a little luck in their favour (but sometimes you make your own). I remember that Liverpool game where Morgan's head was considered a hand, and that Van Dijk offside. Swings and roundabouts.


As for my opinion for the penalties, what PendlePie said sums up my thoughts. Though I was a more cringe about Huth than I was for Simpson. Simpson I felt was good, it came off Kasper and into him. Huth... I think SM sums it up by suggesting distance is probably the major reason, that and the fact that Austin and the others chose not to persist with it. Huth was more noteworthy than Simpson in my opinion. The context surrounding Simpson would make it very harsh.

I think giving both of them would be harsh, but as noted, I've seen them given for less, and some not for more. They weren't stonewall, and I think it was in the discretion of the ref to make his choice based on what he has seen. Thankfully, no further action was taken. (Then again, if the Simpson one was given, if Mane was taking it, he was going to miss anyway. How the hell did he not score?!)


This is why you've got to score more than 1-0, things like this can and will bite really hard. I still have visions of Villa.


Though that said, this really should've been booked, how disgusting:


Not really, that was funny. You're doing good Vards, you'll get your chance to make it to 20.


The table is purely about incorrect decisions paid for or against, nothing to do with whether they result in goals.

The fact Simpson actively swats the ball away which you see on replays - with his arm moving backwards and out from his body guiding the ball - makes it a stonewaller for me. I can understand why given the context and real time speed that the ref may not have been able to see it properly to give it. But there's no debate with the benefit of replays.
 
The table is purely about incorrect decisions paid for or against, nothing to do with whether they result in goals.

The fact Simpson actively swats the ball away which you see on replays - with his arm moving backwards and out from his body guiding the ball - makes it a stonewaller for me. I can understand why given the context and real time speed that the ref may not have been able to see it properly to give it. But there's no debate with the benefit of replays.

That’s the thing, that table only highlighting the ‘game changing’ moments. I’m not seeing anything about suspect yellows or dangerous free kicks that don’t result in anything (though yellows make players less likely to take risks). Which is why I noted that Mahrez free kick. If Okazaki didn’t score, would that have even come up at all?

Well, I’m looking at it again now that I’ve found it, the arm is coming back and the eyes are on the ball, but that’s because his arm is in his natural running position (you can see it before the incident). Put it to you this way, there’s only one other position it could be in all things considered (which would be high above his head, away from his body), and that would be extremely blatant. In fact, if he kept his arm perfectly still when the ball was struck, that would be more blatant since he’s increased his area. As a defender, its just unavoidable if you want to defend.

As noted, you have seen them given for less, but even Southampton’s players didn’t put much of an effort into the claim. Mane's teammate was more angry that Mane didn't pass the ball than anything.

Here it is again, just in case anyone hasn’t seen it.



I think Huth’s is more of a shout than Simpson. I can see why some people would think Simpson's was a penalty, but as that panel decided, it was the correct decision. On another day, we may not have been as fortunate, and I'll admit that.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

That’s the thing, that table only highlighting the ‘game changing’ moments. I’m not seeing anything about suspect yellows or dangerous free kicks that don’t result in anything (though yellows make players less likely to take risks). Which is why I noted that Mahrez free kick. If Okazaki didn’t score, would that have even come up at all?

Well, I’m looking at it again now that I’ve found it, the arm is coming back and the eyes are on the ball, but that’s because his arm is in his natural running position (you can see it before the incident). Put it to you this way, there’s only one other position it could be in all things considered (which would be high above his head, away from his body), and that would be extremely blatant. In fact, if he kept his arm perfectly still when the ball was struck, that would be more blatant since he’s increased his area. As a defender, its just unavoidable if you want to defend.

As noted, you have seen them given for less, but even Southampton’s players didn’t put much of an effort into the claim. Mane's teammate was more angry that Mane didn't pass the ball than anything.

Here it is again, just in case anyone hasn’t seen it.



I think Huth’s is more of a shout than Simpson. I can see why some people would think Simpson's was a penalty, but as that panel decided, it was the correct decision. On another day, we may not have been as fortunate, and I'll admit that.


People are probably sick of the discussion so I'll run through it one final time then drop it:

For a handball to be given, and in this case a penalty:
- The arm has to be raised in an unnatural position (check, his arm is not by his side)
- The arm has to be moving towards the ball (check, his arm swings back and 'swats' the ball)
- The arm has to contact with the ball and influence its path (check, the ball is deflected)

For the handball in this instance not to be given:
- Raised arm can be present (unnatural does not equal handball)
- Raised arm must be stationary (that is, ball to hand not hand to ball)
- Ball's trajectory is not influenced by the arm (that is, it bounces off naturally)
 
People are probably sick of the discussion so I'll run through it one final time then drop it:

For a handball to be given, and in this case a penalty:
- The arm has to be raised in an unnatural position (check, his arm is not by his side)
- The arm has to be moving towards the ball (check, his arm swings back and 'swats' the ball)
- The arm has to contact with the ball and influence its path (check, the ball is deflected)

For the handball in this instance not to be given:
- Raised arm can be present (unnatural does not equal handball)
- Raised arm must be stationary (that is, ball to hand not hand to ball)
- Ball's trajectory is not influenced by the arm (that is, it bounces off naturally)

Thanks for the clarification. I know you're an official for the leagues, so I know you do have some vested interests in this.

On the basis, I think its the first point that is the debatable one, and you would have to be extremely sure of it. I think it was part of his running movement. There is a case for both sides, and its up to the discretion of the referee. This time around, we were lucky the ref choose not to make more of it, but it could be a very different story next time.

Which against goes to the point... SCORE MORE THAN 1 GOAL, YOU MONGS.
 
Thanks for the clarification. I know you're an official for the leagues, so I know you do have some vested interests in this.

On the basis, I think its the first point that is the debatable one, and you would have to be extremely sure of it. I think it was part of his running movement. There is a case for both sides, and its up to the discretion of the referee. This time around, we were lucky the ref choose not to make more of it, but it could be a very different story next time.

Which against goes to the point... SCORE MORE THAN 1 GOAL, YOU MONGS.

Yep agreed, the only point of contention I can see is whether his arm is in an unnatural position and that's the subjective part of it. I would say it is because it's raised and moves out from his body, but I can understand some would say it's a natural running position.
 
I'm not having a go at Leicester BTW for posting that table, I just thought it'd create a bit of discussion if I shared it on here, and well done to Fryer Tuck for actually finding the source behind it and how a 5 man panel analyses it etc.

Was probably more so for justification at how West Ham haven't had a good run lately with that sort of thing instead I suppose, but as I've said previously, it's swings and roundabouts and hopefully it'll turn for us soon.
 
Yep agreed, the only point of contention I can see is whether his arm is in an unnatural position and that's the subjective part of it. I would say it is because it's raised and moves out from his body, but I can understand some would say it's a natural running position.

Pretty much a call either way could have been construed as a correct decision.

Obviously Leicester got lucky because the referee gives a red card if he's awarding a penalty there and that changes the game completely with Leicester a man down and most likely a goal down.
 
Pretty much a call either way could have been construed as a correct decision.

Obviously Leicester got lucky because the referee gives a red card if he's awarding a penalty there and that changes the game completely with Leicester a man down and most likely a goal down.
I don't know if it's a red because his arms in front of his chest, but not sure how it gets adjudged in that sort of situation, as his arm is moving away from his chest.
 
I'm not having a go at Leicester BTW for posting that table, I just thought it'd create a bit of discussion if I shared it on here, and well done to Fryer Tuck for actually finding the source behind it and how a 5 man panel analyses it etc.

Was probably more so for justification at how West Ham haven't had a good run lately with that sort of thing instead I suppose, but as I've said previously, it's swings and roundabouts and hopefully it'll turn for us soon.

What sort of decisions do they include? I was at the West Ham away game and whoever scored the first goal tackled Moreno from behind up the other end of her pitch with a blatant foul and ended up going down the other end and scoring. Not sure if that decision was included but it clearly led to West Ham scoring the first goal against us and also Moreno going off injured later in the game. Even the home fans in the Bobby Moore stand couldn't belive the foul wasn't given.
 
I don't know if it's a red because his arms in front of his chest, but not sure how it gets adjudged in that sort of situation, as his arm is moving away from his chest.

I guess it would be up to the referee to decide if there was a clear goalscoring opportunity.

I don't think there would have been too many complaints from Jatz & Co if a penalty / red card was awarded tbf.

How did your first game go? Anyone call you a campaigner?
 
I guess it would be up to the referee to decide if there was a clear goalscoring opportunity.

I don't think there would have been too many complaints from Jatz & Co if a penalty / red card was awarded tbf.

How did your first game go? Anyone call you a campaigner?
Check out the on topic thread, all went smooth but three games in the heat wore me down. Today's the first day my leg hasn't been impacted by the cramp.
 
What sort of decisions do they include? I was at the West Ham away game and whoever scored the first goal tackled Moreno from behind up the other end of her pitch with a blatant foul and ended up going down the other end and scoring. Not sure if that decision was included but it clearly led to West Ham scoring the first goal against us and also Moreno going off injured later in the game. Even the home fans in the Bobby Moore stand couldn't belive the foul wasn't given.
Would probably have to check that site back in Jan to see if it was or not.

Think you're referring to the Michail Antonio tackle on Moreno if memory serves me correctly.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Matchday 32


Write your reply...
Back
Top