Penalty decision yesterday

[Barney]

he went to tackle him and clipped him.Are you denying the defender didn't stick his leg out ? it was quite clear from near the front of the KOP. Fans and the ref don't got slo-mos.The slo mo to me doesn't show anything different .Where in the ground were you sat and did you think it was a pen at the time ?

I was in the south stand, I wasn't sure at the time he looked to go down dramatically but watching the video confirms that it was a dive. I don't understand how you can say he clipped him, to me it's visually clear that he didn't, if there was any contact there it was as a result of Caruthers throwing his leg on to Wheater's. But we won that's the most important thing.

 

[INTAKE BLADE]

Ask yourself, why would he go down? cos he had a tap in otherwise, so a pen for me.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

No way was that a pen.


As another poster said above that took a bit of the shine off what was a great win yesterday.

No it didn't.

 

[Fanny magnet]

People seem to be seeing what they want to see
It's an optical illusion like that dress or the 40 thousand pigs at swillsborough

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

I was in the south stand, I wasn't sure at the time he looked to go down dramatically but watching the video confirms that it was a dive. I don't understand how you can say he clipped him, to me it's visually clear that he didn't, if there was any contact there it was as a result of Caruthers throwing his leg on to Wheater's. But we won that's the most important thing.

Shame a Blades goal spoilt your weekend.

##shakes head##

 

[JonnyRed(WCFC)]

I thought he turned the Bolton defender a treat and stitched him like a kipper from where I was sat, they were desperate tackles flying in on him as he had full momentum, wouldve been a brilliant goal had he had the chance to tuck it away and one you'd still talk about 5 or 10 years down the line!

 

[Fulwood Blade]

dive

shit happens...............move on

UTB

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

People seem to be seeing what they want to see
It's an optical illusion like that dress or the 40 thousand pigs at swillsborough

Joker! As if there would ever only be 40,000 at Hillsborough!

 

[Tunstall Fred]

I thought he turned the Bolton defender a treat and stitched him like a kipper from where I was sat, they were desperate tackles flying in on him as he had full momentum, wouldve been a brilliant goal had he had the chance to tuck it away and one you'd still talk about 5 or 10 years down the line!

Then he repeated it down the other flank,ending up with him toe ending it into the side netting,superb cameo from Carruthers

 

[Barney]

Shame a Blades goal spoilt your weekend.

##shakes head##

Must have missed where I said that.

 

[Blend-it-like-Harris]

CONTACT!!

 

[Fanny magnet]

View attachment 23790

CONTACT!!

Penalty 365 days a year

 

[Fulwood Blade]

UTB

 

[penthouseblade]

Then he repeated it down the other flank,ending up with him toe ending it into the side netting,superb cameo from Carruthers

Now that WAS a great piece of play!!

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Once we've sorted out the penalty debate, can we have a thread to decide how long Fleck should get for his on-field assault yesterday? Really took the shine off the result – I want a speedy trial and him sentenced by tea-time tomorrow.

 

[Sheffsteel]

Takes the fucking shine off the win ???

Are you for real ?

I think it's another one of Barneys look at me attention seeking wind up comments.
We were comfortably the better team and at least 2 goals better than them. Fair result.

 

[LJBlade]

he went to tackle him and clipped him.Are you denying the defender didn't stick his leg out ? it was quite clear from near the front of the KOP. Fans and the ref don't got slo-mos.The slo mo to me doesn't show anything different .Where in the ground were you sat and did you think it was a pen at the time ?

For what it's worth I was sat quite near the front of the Kop and the incident was right in front of me. I thought at the time that there didn't look like much contact and on the video it doesn't look like there was much contact, though Carruthers does a good job of making it seem like there was.

I couldn't care either way though, we would've won without that penalty

 

[Blend-it-like-Harris]

Ok guys - frame by frame shows:
No contact on the ball by the defender.
Samir digs in low centre of gravity to pull the ball across and well away from the defender at very sharp angle (classic George Best)
Defender leads with his right but misses and is flat-footed beaten all-ends-up - faces opposite direction.
His man's gone past him but his left foot catches him; very difficult for Samir to stay on his feet
On contact his arms for balance become arms raised in appeal - he knows he's caught him even though he can't see where he's gone!
2nd defender is at least 10 yards away.
There are TWENTY ONE frames then showing the ball eventually coming under the 2nd defenders control - the ball was still well within Samir's control had he kept going. We were denied a fabulous goal by a crude centre-back.
Looking at the video last night I thought he may have dived. Having analysed the higher res video I now know there was contact with the player, and certainly not with the ball.
I know some will still not believe it though!

 

[Fanny magnet]

Ok guys - frame by frame shows:
No contact on the ball by the defender.
Samir digs in low centre of gravity to pull the ball across and well away from the defender at very sharp angle (classic George Best)
Defender leads with his right but misses and is flat-footed beaten all-ends-up - faces opposite direction.
His man's gone past him but his left foot catches him; very difficult for Samir to stay on his feet
On contact his arms for balance become arms raised in appeal - he knows he's caught him even though he can't see where he's gone!
2nd defender is at least 10 yards away.
There are TWENTY ONE frames then showing the ball eventually coming under the 2nd defenders control - the ball was still well within Samir's control had he kept going. We were denied a fabulous goal by a crude centre-back.
Looking at the video last night I thought he may have dived. Having analysed the higher res video I now know there was contact with the player, and certainly not with the ball.
I know some will still not believe it though!

Like I said people see what they want to see

 

[penthouseblade]

Ok guys - frame by frame shows:
No contact on the ball by the defender.
Samir digs in low centre of gravity to pull the ball across and well away from the defender at very sharp angle (classic George Best)
Defender leads with his right but misses and is flat-footed beaten all-ends-up - faces opposite direction.
His man's gone past him but his left foot catches him; very difficult for Samir to stay on his feet
On contact his arms for balance become arms raised in appeal - he knows he's caught him even though he can't see where he's gone!
2nd defender is at least 10 yards away.
There are TWENTY ONE frames then showing the ball eventually coming under the 2nd defenders control - the ball was still well within Samir's control had he kept going. We were denied a fabulous goal by a crude centre-back.
Looking at the video last night I thought he may have dived. Having analysed the higher res video I now know there was contact with the player, and certainly not with the ball.
I know some will still not believe it though!

If there was contact (debatable), it still doesn't mean it's a foul. If Carruthers was dabbed on the foot or whatever you think it was, he doesn't have to fall down like he's been fucking shot!

 

[LJBlade]

Like I said people see what they want to see

So because people disagree with you they're the ones who 'are seeing what they want to see'? It could be argued that those who are seeing the contact are seeing what they want to see.

There's no way, regardless of how much you slow it down, that you can use the video to prove definitively that there was or wasn't contact, unless you can really zoom in and look at it from different angles.

As I said, I couldn't care less anyway. I just don't like the idea that those with a different opinion are the ones who are lying to themselves.

 

[Blade58]

I've viewed it about 10 times and can I fk tell whether it was a legitimate foul or not

 

[Fanny magnet]

So because people disagree with you they're the ones who 'are seeing what they want to see'? It could be argued that those who are seeing the contact are seeing what they want to see.

There's no way, regardless of how much you slow it down, that you can use the video to prove definitively that there was or wasn't contact, unless you can really zoom in and look at it from different angles.

As I said, I couldn't care less anyway. I just don't like the idea that those with a different opinion are the ones who are lying to themselves.

I think you're putting words into my mouth
Please don't do that

 

[davidblade]

It was a dive. Fact.

I'm not sure either way but
Who gives a flying fuck , we've been denied plenty so , perhaps in his spare time he's been watching that diving pig from S6

 

[LJBlade]

I think you're putting words into my mouth
Please don't do that

Which words have I put in your mouth? Apologies if I've mixed you up with someone else

 

[Fanny magnet]

Which words have I put in your mouth? Apologies if I've mixed you up with someone else

So because people disagree with you they're the ones who 'are seeing what they want to see'? It could be argued that those who are seeing the contact are seeing what they want to see.

There's no way, regardless of how much you slow it down, that you can use the video to prove definitively that there was or wasn't contact, unless you can really zoom in and look at it from different angles.

As I said, I couldn't care less anyway. I just don't like the idea that those with a different opinion are the ones who are lying to themselves.

 

[Gavlar]

blatant dive, but still its done now. Great performance and win yesterday

 

[LJBlade]

Again, which words have I put in your mouth? We're you not the one who said "people see what they want to see"?

 

[Fanny magnet]

Again, which words have I put in your mouth? We're you not the one who said "people see what they want to see"?

So because people disagree with you they're the ones who 'are seeing what they want to see'? It could be argued that those who are seeing the contact are seeing what they want to see.

There's no way, regardless of how much you slow it down, that you can use the video to prove definitively that there was or wasn't contact, unless you can really zoom in and look at it from different angles.

As I said, I couldn't care less anyway. I just don't like the idea that those with a different opinion are the ones who are lying to themselves.

 

[Hodgyman]

I was in the south stand, I wasn't sure at the time he looked to go down dramatically but watching the video confirms that it was a dive. I don't understand how you can say he clipped him, to me it's visually clear that he didn't, if there was any contact there it was as a result of Caruthers throwing his leg on to Wheater's. But we won that's the most important thing.

My guess is that you should have gone to Specsavers. Is there a branch in S6?