Weekend games 11/12th Jan

[goonertux]

Feel for the barcodes. That was a goal. Get your money on a red card unless things simmer down quickly. Can still see them nicking a draw, hopefully!

[Dan_85]

https://vine.co/v/hLaFLIbWPgW

"Shut ya noise you fucking old *word censored*" Pardew is a bellend.

[Rosicky's Right Boot]

The league is fixed.

If you think lowlifes like Abramovich and other billionaires who made their money through dodgy deals in backwater countries that lack a rigorous and robust legal system would come over here and simply play by the rules then quite frankly that is delusional. Chelsea have been paying off officials and/or the football authorities in some capacity for years now, it would seem that Man City have followed suit.

[goonertux]

The league is fixed.

If you think lowlifes like Abramovich and other billionaires who made their money through dodgy deals in backwater countries that lack a rigorous and robust legal system would come over here and simply play by the rules then quite frankly that is delusional. Chelsea have been paying off officials and/or the football authorities in some capacity for years now, it would seem that Man City have followed suit.

Are you sure of that RRB? So did they forget to pay Mark Clattenburg the week the Chavs played Manure? Just another example of terrible refereeing in my book. If Newcastle keep pushing, I think they'll nick the draw. Suddenly, this is a great game to watch!

[northbank123]

As a keeper it's infuriating when a striker is standing right in front of you blocking your vision, or moves as if to touch the ball and doesn't. Likewise when somebody is standing offside and dummies the ball or otherwise distracts the defender and then a bloke runs from an onside position to latch onto it. All those should be called offside imo.

But Newcastle's goal just wasn't. He wasn't even nearly in Hart's line of vision and didn't distract him. I'm not saying it's an easy option to disallow a goal like that in front of nearly 50,000 screaming Geordies but would he have reached the same conclusion if he didn't have several players from a top team badgering him in a televised match? Not a chance.

The ball was past Hart so quickly he didn't even dive ffs. The only conclusion that can back the ref's decision is that Hart was prevented from diving by the player there - otherwise he can't have been interfering with play.

[armchair]

Could he not be deemed to be "interfering" because he had to duck to avoid the ball?

This is what the ref gave................I think?

[northbank123]

Could he not be deemed to be "interfering" because he had to duck to avoid the ball?

This is what the ref gave................I think?

I agree that's probably why the ref gave it. But how is that in itself interfering? The ball ended up exactly where it would have if he hadn't been in an offside position.

Surely if you don't touch the ball you are only 'interfering' if you change the actions of an opposition player? He didn't block Hart's vision, he didn't block off a defender trying to make a block. If the ball had been closer to Hart then I would understand the decision a bit more but when a shot is rifled in like that as a keeper your instinct is diving to save it regardless of whether it's 1-on-1 or whether the box is packed with players.

The only reason Hart doesn't dive is because it flew in the corner before he had a chance to, Gouffran's presence imo made absolutely no difference to Hart's movements/decision, the trajectory of the ball or the ultimate outcome and therefore can't be said to be interfering.

[rodders999]

The lesbian has done a Theo there is say. Bang goes his World Cup and all.

[LDB]

Horror tackle on Nasri, stretchered off

[northbank123]

Pertinent passage of the offside law:

"'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball."

[goonertux]

Pertinent passage of the offside law:

"'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball."

In that case, it's a goal as Gouffran did none of that.

[armchair]

Pertinent passage of the offside law:

"'interfering with an opponent' means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball."

He certaintly didnt "obstruct the opponents line of vision" and he didnt "challenge for the ball" either.
His presence albeit in an "offside position" really didnt affect the outcome at all.

[northbank123]

Fuck. Citeh are good enough anyway without refs helping them out like that.

They've now taken 28 points from their last 10 games and given they're seemingly an unstoppable juggernaut at home all they needed was to cut out a third of the silly points they were dropping on the road and the league is theirs.

[Dan_85]

Fuck. Citeh are good enough anyway without refs helping them out like that.

They've now taken 28 points from their last 10 games and given they're seemingly an unstoppable juggernaut at home all they needed was to cut out a third of the silly points they were dropping on the road and the league is theirs.

They're coming good when it matters, whereas I feel we're gonna get knackered and fall apart with our paper thin squad.

[rodders999]

How does Skertel get away with dragging the jersey off opponents every single fucking week?? The referees in this league are beyond ridicule at this stage