Discussion
Hackney said:
Pretty sure Nico would’ve been on that post for their first goal if he wasn’t forced off - it affects every club but I do not understand how a team
Can be disadvantaged because a player got injured.
And what was all that after the game Sky trying to create some controversy over the pitch? Didn’t see any issues in the game.
Was having Neco off an error on our behalf though? Could we not have subbed him off? I dont really know the rules here. Can be disadvantaged because a player got injured.
And what was all that after the game Sky trying to create some controversy over the pitch? Didn’t see any issues in the game.
I only caught a bit of Keane's comments on the pitch but I thought he was potentially giving Woodinho an excuse for missing the first one? I could easily have got that wrong though!
The G Kid said:
Was having Neco off an error on our behalf though? Could we not have subbed him off? I dont really know the rules here.
I only caught a bit of Keane's comments on the pitch but I thought he was potentially giving Woodinho an excuse for missing the first one? I could easily have got that wrong though!
It’s a funny one. I only caught a bit of Keane's comments on the pitch but I thought he was potentially giving Woodinho an excuse for missing the first one? I could easily have got that wrong though!
Last week when there was a nasty clash of heads between MGW and an Everton player after lengthy treatment they substituted their player. Who was able to join the action immediately.
Meanwhile MGW who required less treatment and was able to carry on had to sit out a minute.
It’s another example of a rule brought in to try and stop one thing, but there are unintended consequences.
Hackney said:
It’s a funny one.
Last week when there was a nasty clash of heads between MGW and an Everton player after lengthy treatment they substituted their player. Who was able to join the action immediately.
Meanwhile MGW who required less treatment and was able to carry on had to sit out a minute.
It’s another example of a rule brought in to try and stop one thing, but there are unintended consequences.
And another example of the governing body not thinking through their decisions properly, or carrying out enough modelling to work out there were flaws in their proposal. Would be easy to work out that the minute sitting out should be void if a substitution then takes place. Last week when there was a nasty clash of heads between MGW and an Everton player after lengthy treatment they substituted their player. Who was able to join the action immediately.
Meanwhile MGW who required less treatment and was able to carry on had to sit out a minute.
It’s another example of a rule brought in to try and stop one thing, but there are unintended consequences.
Gargamel said:
Rumours flying we might get a couple of our points deduction back.
That’s what I’d heard through a friend of a friend. Hopefully no smoke without fire - this would be a massive bonus for our chances of staying up. Unless the team decide they don’t need to win as many matches because of it!Sport_Turismo_GTS said:
That’s what I’d heard through a friend of a friend. Hopefully no smoke without fire - this would be a massive bonus for our chances of staying up. Unless the team decide they don’t need to win as many matches because of it!
You will be fine even if you don’t get any points back.Gargamel said:
I mean I will take 17th two seasons running, but I think the dream was to be more Brighton...
Fingers crossed
Didn't Brighton finish 17th or similar for their first two season back in the Prem? Fingers crossed
After going to the Amex to watch us lose a couple of months ago, I would want us to be nothing like them! Dull football, silent crowd...
If we get 2 points back, Luton and Burnley both lose at the weekend and we beat the Blunts, we could be singing the Waka Waka song on Saturday evening!
Fast Bug said:
I have you guys heard the VAR from the game against us? Shocking from the officials all round. That was a nailed on penalty for you and they didn't make the ref go and look at the monitor.
I have only heard the comedy commentary on a couple of clips. I think Darren Farley did one? Have you heard the official one?ETA, just watched it on YouTube. I think it gives more credibility to the corruption claims.
Edited by The G Kid on Wednesday 1st May 16:56
Fast Bug said:
Corrupt is probably a bit far, clueless or rubbish at their jobs more accurate. A draw would've suited Luton more, and that could've made the game 1-1
Sorry, but I disagree on both parts! In that situation you want one club to be closer by losing and not the draw. At the time they only needed to be above one of us, not both. And it's difficult to believe anyone is that clueless at their job??
The G Kid said:
Sorry, but I disagree on both parts! In that situation you want one club to be closer by losing and not the draw. At the time they only needed to be above one of us, not both.
And it's difficult to believe anyone is that clueless at their job??
Surely you want 2 clubs to be in the mix rather than 1 pulling clear? You've doubled your chance of a club ahead of you fAnd it's difficult to believe anyone is that clueless at their job??
king things up and they've both only pulled away by a single point.And did you see the Spurs Liverpool game? After that I can believe anything.
I'm also sure you guys will be safe this season
Fast Bug said:
The G Kid said:
Sorry, but I disagree on both parts! In that situation you want one club to be closer by losing and not the draw. At the time they only needed to be above one of us, not both.
And it's difficult to believe anyone is that clueless at their job??
Surely you want 2 clubs to be in the mix rather than 1 pulling clear? You've doubled your chance of a club ahead of you fAnd it's difficult to believe anyone is that clueless at their job??
king things up and they've both only pulled away by a single point.And did you see the Spurs Liverpool game? After that I can believe anything.
I'm also sure you guys will be safe this season
Everton win suits Luton more than a draw.
And re the VAR commentary it rubs me up the wrong way that they all use their nicknames (Same in the other game under review, Brighton I think)
Smacks of protecting their mates by not contradicting the onfield decision.
I don’t think there’s an anti-Forest conspiracy, I think there’s a protect your fellow officials conspiracy.
Smacks of protecting their mates by not contradicting the onfield decision.
I don’t think there’s an anti-Forest conspiracy, I think there’s a protect your fellow officials conspiracy.
Hackney said:
From Luton’s point of view they only need to finish above one other club. Better to have one club open a gap and the other get nothing than both clubs edge a little further away.
Everton win suits Luton more than a draw.
Especially with Luton's goal difference. 1 point gain for both teams means Luton need 2. Forest losing meant Luton's survival target didn't increase. Everton win suits Luton more than a draw.
The G Kid said:
Sorry, but I disagree on both parts! In that situation you want one club to be closer by losing and not the draw. At the time they only needed to be above one of us, not both.
And it's difficult to believe anyone is that clueless at their job??
Have you seen your buffoon owner?And it's difficult to believe anyone is that clueless at their job??
As always lots of people criticising but I bet nobody in this thread is a referee. If nobody wants to do it because fans are d
heads then of course the quality will be low. Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff