Don't like knocking Referees

[Cardero]

I seem to recall another of my favourite refs, Keith Stroud, being more than happy to watch a Brentford shot drift harmlessly wide before bringing play back and awarding a penalty for the "coming together" of the Brentford forward and George Long after the shot had gone in that debacle of a game the other year when it ended up 5 a-side after 14 penalties.... I think this is one of the cases where either interpretation is correct as long as it disadvantages us in some way.....

 

[Jehovah]

Jtxjfrxurxtjcrjtjtcjttjxtt tilt what the fuck is Howard doing??????????

 

[Silent Blade]

I seem to remember a game at the lane , when a certain player got in his shot after being " fouled " in the area ,
shot was saved , but ref blew for a peno , and good old stevie G , buried it to save a point against us , rules are rules I suppose , if ever there was a time to pin something up in the dressing room , to get the team motivated surely this is the time .
Let's do these on Monday .

It was Robbie Fowler not Steve Gerrard who scored from the penalty

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

Don't like knocking Referees, doing this sometimes sounds like sour grapes or looking for excuses, but after watching the TV replay something's must be said, in NC's after match interview he made specific comment about the 3 penalty calls, the disallowed Done goal and the none play-on rule when Done was one on one with the defender.

The first one was the hand ball and think it is unanimously agreed by everyone (on TV and Swindon fans) that it should have been penalty, the Ref had a great view so no excusses likewise for the Done one on one, I'm not sure on the Murphy penalty appeal, could have been given but not much contact, but the same amount of contact was made by Done which ruled out is goal? But the one I want to discuss is the foul on Flynn (on 70 minutes) by Nathan Byrne which was also a definite penalty and more to the point a sending off offence, It was dangerous and could have resulted in a serious injury to Flynn (a two footed lunge with both feet off the ground tackle). Do you think United should (or could) ask the FA to review the incident? and if needbe punish the player?

I don't think Utd would appeal the two footed challenge Lawrence, wouldn't change the result, nor put Byrne out of the second leg, just make us feel a bit better. Pity the ref fell for the dive by the player Done was challenging for the disallowed goal, soon as he felt a hand on him, the defender fell like he'd been shot. Referee had his eyes painted on.

 

[Lawrence]

I don't think Utd would appeal the two footed challenge Lawrence, wouldn't change the result, nor put Byrne out of the second leg, just make us feel a bit better. Pity the ref fell for the dive by the player Done was challenging for the disallowed goal, soon as he felt a hand on him, the defender fell like he'd been shot. Referee had his eyes painted on.

Jerome just scored for Norwich (v Ipswich) identical to the Done disallowed goal.

 

[dublin 10 blade]

It was Robbie Fowler not Steve Gerrard who scored from the penalty

Tip my cap in your direction , for the correction , thank you , SB .

 

[Pittsburg Blade]

I seem to remember a game at the lane , when a certain player got in his shot after being " fouled " in the area ,
shot was saved , but ref blew for a peno , and good old stevie G , buried it to save a point against us , rules are rules I suppose , if ever there was a time to pin something up in the dressing room , to get the team motivated surely this is the time .
Let's do these on Monday .

And that particular tackle had ZERO contact, not both sets of studs down the shins.

 

[JohnDenver]

Only just watched the footage after a couple of days, and I was surprised how unfortunate we were with the decisions. At the time I thought no penalty for handball, a foul by Done, and nothing obvious on flynn. I was wrong...

But then Swindon were the better team for most of the game so I can't feel cheated.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

He had a perfect view of the handball incident and didn't give it. Can somebody clear the rule up for me? The ball was heading towards the net/penalty spot from our cross/pass and it hits Swindon player on outstretched arm. How is this not a penalty as it possibly stopped us scoring?

It has to be deemed deliberate so his hands would have to be in an unnatural position. Didn't think they were on the night but I've yet to watch it again.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Ok watched it again.
First penalty claim wasn't a pen, it's ball to hand.
Their penalty was a stone waller.
The Flynn challenge should have resulted in a penalty and there wasn't a foul in the build up to Dones goal.

 

[Elsecar_Blade]

Another get out, due to our indifferent season. If we'd have just ended up in the play offs, missing out on automatic by goal difference, you'd have a totally different attitude to it.
Take the game on the individual merits. We took the game to them and we're robbed of easy obvious dicisions. These were game changing. You can take comfort for yourself if you think Swindon played better but that is a bit crap considering we created and were not given the dicisions to justifyably take those chances.
Some may criticise Management tactics and some of the players through the season but on that night, given our limitations, all worked their bollocks off to get a result and one persons incompetence out of our control robbed everyone who has any association with Sheffield United of that.

I have taken the game on it's individual merits, take the red and white glasses off and look at what happened. First half hour, we took the game to Swindon and could have been a couple of goals up but the momentum had gone before half time. Swindon were beginning to get on top and had the penalty (which it was) and the other good chance from a mix-up - two good saves from Howard were needed to prevent it being 1-1 at half time. For the opening half an hour of the second half, we never got going and never competed with Swindon who, if they had their shooting boots on, could well have tested Howard far more than they did. Deserved equaliser and it could, probably should, have been more. United woke up with 10 minutes left and had a few more chances and the disallowed goal but Swindon dominated for a long period and, in my opinion, were the better team. A draw was probably the fair result but I think Swindon shaded it and deserved a winner more than United.

However, the referee did indeed cost us. Two penalties and a goal for Done OR three penalties (if Done's was a foul, then it was a foul on Murphy first half) for sure as well as a few other strange decisions. We could conceivably have won quite comfortably but it would not have been deserved. I don't say that lightly but it was clear that Swindon were the more composed side and, once they settled down from a poor start, tore us to pieces down the right. Second half, without Basham in the middle, they dominated across the midfield and Murphy never got into the game like he did first half. Yes, the referee could have and should have given us the lifeline but we deserved no more than a draw and Swindon were, if there had to be a winner, the more deserving winner.

 

[secretchief]

The handball incident was clearly ball to hand and in no way a deliberate attempt to stop the ball.

His arms were by his sides. What exactly are people supposing he does with his arms? Where else could they possibly be so he can avoid it being a penalty?

 

[grafikhaus]

Ok watched it again.
First penalty claim wasn't a pen, it's ball to hand.
Their penalty was a stone waller.
The Flynn challenge should have resulted in a penalty and there wasn't a foul in the build up to Dones goal.

The handball incident was clearly ball to hand and in no way a deliberate attempt to stop the ball.

His arms were by his sides. What exactly are people supposing he does with his arms? Where else could they possibly be so he can avoid it being a penalty?

Blimey! Who'd be a ref? (although he was a cunt).

My opinion is that their penalty was correct.
My opinion is that the challenge on Flynn was a 'man or ball' challenge seen in many games and I'm not surprised it wasn't given.
My opinion is that, having put his hand on the opponent's shoulder, Done's goal should - technically - have been disallowed. The whistle went almost immediately. However, it's one of those decisions that depends whch teams are playing, as we saw yet again with Palace v Man. U yesterday.

Now the handball. This is not my opinion but the clear evidence provided by metalblades' vid. in post #30. 'Ball to hand'??? 'His arms were by his sides'??? WTF??? Watch closely. The Swindon player clearly and obviously moved his left arm to block the ball. Arms by his sides? Should've gone to Specsavers. This is the best I could do with the footage:

 

[Bath Blade]

The one I remember as being most frustrating was pretty much the only time he gave us a free kick. Done was through into the penalty area and the ref wouldn't play advantage and brought the play back to the half way line for a foul on one of our players.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Has anyone checked the Far East betting markets for unusual activity?

Some refs make bad decisions against both sides. In this game every single major decision went against us and none went against Swindon. Very unusual.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

grafikhaus He doesn't get the ball on the Flynny challenge so it's a foul isn't it? I'd also say he isn't in control so it's also dangerous play too.

 

[boo radley]

I have taken the game on it's individual merits, take the red and white glasses off and look at what happened. First half hour, we took the game to Swindon and could have been a couple of goals up but the momentum had gone before half time. Swindon were beginning to get on top and had the penalty (which it was) and the other good chance from a mix-up - two good saves from Howard were needed to prevent it being 1-1 at half time. For the opening half an hour of the second half, we never got going and never competed with Swindon who, if they had their shooting boots on, could well have tested Howard far more than they did. Deserved equaliser and it could, probably should, have been more. United woke up with 10 minutes left and had a few more chances and the disallowed goal but Swindon dominated for a long period and, in my opinion, were the better team. A draw was probably the fair result but I think Swindon shaded it and deserved a winner more than United.

However, the referee did indeed cost us. Two penalties and a goal for Done OR three penalties (if Done's was a foul, then it was a foul on Murphy first half) for sure as well as a few other strange decisions. We could conceivably have won quite comfortably but it would not have been deserved. I don't say that lightly but it was clear that Swindon were the more composed side and, once they settled down from a poor start, tore us to pieces down the right. Second half, without Basham in the middle, they dominated across the midfield and Murphy never got into the game like he did first half. Yes, the referee could have and should have given us the lifeline but we deserved no more than a draw and Swindon were, if there had to be a winner, the more deserving winner.

Talk about having two voices. How contradictory is that. Try the attempts on goal. We had more - no. Try the corners we had more - no. Try the fouls against. It all points to them being under greater chance of conceding despite the fact they had 54% (wowee) possession. They looked threatening at times but you take your "we've played crap all season so I'm willing to to give the other team more credit" glasses off and give us the credit we deserve. As stated before you are not looking at the game as an individual. The ref changed the game through his astonishingly consistent bad decisions. so to say they deserved to win is beyond me. THEY WON BY SCORING MORE GOALS AND WITH THE HELP OF (INTENDED OR NOT) AN INCOMPETENT REFEREE.

 

[Ballinpigpubs13]

All this ahem "ball to hand" bollox. Clear it up by going back to simple if it hits your arm/hand it's a penalty.
All this wankness is caused by some nobhead upstairs as with all companies thinking they're changing things for the better. AMF

 

[bladesadviser]

This season is the first time I have had a season ticket and the thing that has stood out for me is the appalling officials. If its not the ref its the linesmen who have match after match just given inept performances and I say for both teams albeit the one on Thursday was criminal to United. If some of the decisions were played out in front of cameras in the PL then we would hear about it all week and they would never ref again. I began to wonder if they can't cope with the big stadium atmosphere as they are used to 5-6000 and they just freeze. I know a linesman who gets matches in our league who has another full time job with no connection to football and I have always hoped we wouldn't get him!!

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Blimey! Who'd be a ref? (although he was a cunt).

My opinion is that their penalty was correct.
My opinion is that the challenge on Flynn was a 'man or ball' challenge seen in many games and I'm not surprised it wasn't given.
My opinion is that, having put his hand on the opponent's shoulder, Done's goal should - technically - have been disallowed. The whistle went almost immediately. However, it's one of those decisions that depends whch teams are playing, as we saw yet again with Palace v Man. U yesterday.

Now the handball. This is not my opinion but the clear evidence provided by metalblades' vid. in post #30. 'Ball to hand'??? 'His arms were by his sides'??? WTF??? Watch closely. The Swindon player clearly and obviously moved his left arm to block the ball. Arms by his sides? Should've gone to Specsavers. This is the best I could do with the footage:

View attachment 11620
View attachment 11621

well done for producing those images- anyone who wants to say that isn't a penalty is being mischievous.

Arm by his side? - Bollocks - as they say, the camera never lies - just a poor decision by another useless referee. Just interested if anyone wants to dispute the photo evidence, We were fortunate to be in BLUT and it was right in front of us, so never needed photo evidence - it was clear as day and we didn't need any second look - just a crap decision.

As for the game, Swindon thoroughly deserved to win the game - but they wouldn't, had that penalty been given and Freeman had popped that one in too.

Think back to when Michael Oliver gave our penalty v Forest in the cup - hand/arm in an un-natural position - same as Swindon.

UTB

 

[Maidenhead]

The handball incident was clearly ball to hand and in no way a deliberate attempt to stop the ball.

His arms were by his sides. What exactly are people supposing he does with his arms? Where else could they possibly be so he can avoid it being a penalty?

By his sides?

I suggest you watch it again.

They were spread wide to close down as much space as possible, which he successfully did

 

[secretchief]

Well I don't want to drive it into the ground, but none of this makes any sense to me.

He doesn't have to take his arm away, he just doesn't have to deliberately obstruct it. If it hits his arm it hits his arm.

I'm not convinced he is deliberately trying to block the path of the ball. Just the way it seems to me.

Ultimately all this proves is that it is a question of interpretation (which is specifically stated in the rules), and hence the referee is well within his rights to award or not as he sees fit.

I am not defending any of the other decisions he made.

 

[Maidenhead]

Well I don't want to drive it into the ground, but none of this makes any sense to me.

He doesn't have to take his arm away, he just doesn't have to deliberately obstruct it. If it hits his arm it hits his arm.

I'm not convinced he is deliberately trying to block the path of the ball. Just the way it seems to me.

Ultimately all this proves is that it is a question of interpretation (which is specifically stated in the rules), and hence the referee is well within his rights to award or not as he sees fit.

I am not defending any of the other decisions he made.

In my view he is using his arms to deliberately close the space for a cross down, which he does successfully.

In my view that amounts to deliberate handball.

Others may disagree, that's their perogative.

It's all history anyway so it doesn't really matter one way or the other

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Well I don't want to drive it into the ground, but none of this makes any sense to me.

He doesn't have to take his arm away, he just doesn't have to deliberately obstruct it. If it hits his arm it hits his arm.

I'm not convinced he is deliberately trying to block the path of the ball. Just the way it seems to me.

Ultimately all this proves is that it is a question of interpretation (which is specifically stated in the rules), and hence the referee is well within his rights to award or not as he sees fit.

I am not defending any of the other decisions he made.

He doesn't have to move his hand to the ball, just hold his arm in an unnatural position.

Let's say a defender in the wall holds his hand out to the side but motionless. If the ball hits it, that is not "Hand to ball" but would still be given as handball.

 

[ZoneManWilf]

If you stick your arm out in the box, you are deliberately raising it. So that to me is handball.

If it was really judged on absolute deliberate intent to handle it, 90% of handballs wouldn't be given. For years the rule has always seemed to be interpteted that if you deliberately move your hands in the air and gain an advantage if the ball hits them, it's handball. It was a cast iron penalty on Thursday for me having re-watched it, and my Swindon mate agrees.

 

[Elsecar_Blade]

Talk about having two voices. How contradictory is that. Try the attempts on goal. We had more - no. Try the corners we had more - no. Try the fouls against. It all points to them being under greater chance of conceding despite the fact they had 54% (wowee) possession. They looked threatening at times but you take your "we've played crap all season so I'm willing to to give the other team more credit" glasses off and give us the credit we deserve. As stated before you are not looking at the game as an individual. The ref changed the game through his astonishingly consistent bad decisions. so to say they deserved to win is beyond me. THEY WON BY SCORING MORE GOALS AND WITH THE HELP OF (INTENDED OR NOT) AN INCOMPETENT REFEREE.

I think you're mixing me up with somebody else, mate. It's got nothing to do with what we have done this season, we're in the Play Offs and deserve to be because we're the 5th best team. Opinion it may be, you're entitled to yours, but Swindon for me were more dangerous and dominated from 31-85 minutes. We were excellent for half hour but even with that, they had as many clear chances first half as we did.

Contradiction it isn't though - the ref WAS inept or bent but that doesn't mean we deserved to win. I've seen us dominate and lose to a controversial penalty, I've seen us be shite and win with controversial decisions. I can still admit when we deserve to win, lose or draw regardless of the referee's performance. We should have won if we'd had the correct decisions but I don't think we'd have deserved to.

Let's hope tonight's referee saw the game and evens it out.

 

[Pittsburg Blade]

It certainly would have been called for handball outside the area.

In my view he is using his arms to deliberately close the space for a cross down, which he does successfully.

In my view that amounts to deliberate handball.

Others may disagree, that's their perogative.

It's all history anyway so it doesn't really matter one way or the other

Would handball have been called if it had happened outside of the penalty area?
I think the answer is yes.
Same for the tackle on Flynn which would have been a red card also if it had happened in the centre circle.
The ref bottled it I'm afraid.

 

[Maidenhead]

It certainly would have been called for handball outside the area.


Would handball have been called if it had happened outside of the penalty area?
I think the answer is yes.
Same for the tackle on Flynn which would have been a red card also if it had happened in the centre circle.
The ref bottled it I'm afraid.

Big time, but it's in the history books now

 

[Mustela Putorius Furo]

All this ahem "ball to hand" bollox. Clear it up by going back to simple if it hits your arm/hand it's a penalty.
All this wankness is caused by some nobhead upstairs as with all companies thinking they're changing things for the better. AMF

"...going back to ...." Wrong way round.

It's never been the rule that "if it hits your arm/hand it's handball". In any case, originally, handling the ball (punching it, controlling it, knocking it on with the hand) was allowed in the earliest forms of the game. Handball as an offence came in to eliminate that, so it was clearly going to be about "deliberate handball" and ball hitting an arm was not even contentious - it was simple: "not handball". Of course, players and referees themselves had a different attitude in the early days, so it's unlikely that ball-to-hand incidents would even have been "appealed".

However, over time, the "deliberate" in "deliberate handball" became ignored by referees and players and that created the focus of debate. Anyway, with the fundamentals of the game, the rules don't change, it's the instruction to referees and clubs coming down from FIFA about how a rule should be interpreted that evolves over time (sometimes in circular fashion).

 

[Lawrence]

OK thanks, that was a great debate! Just to finish and put this debacle into perspective - The poor, poor decisions he made at the Lane may have cost Sheffield United £6million + NC is job! (Aw and also another season in this god-forsaken league)

So well done 'Darren Bond, that's D A R R EN ~ B O N D a great nights work, hope I never to see you at any ground that the a Blades visit in the future!

Post photograph here.