So who scored the equaliser....

[1066blade]

This was done Saturday at 8:17pm, so why are we discussing it on a new thread today? Posters have been shot for less.

 

[Pinchy]

Robinson’s goal then?

If no touch by Moose, yes. As you know, the test is whether it would have gone in had the opponent not got a touch. If it flicks a team-mate, however slightly or inadvertently, it’s the team-mate’s goal.

 

[Pinchy]

It could have come off Zouma’s left testicle, or Moose’s earhole for all I care. It went in, that’s all that matters.

The latter is close to impossible:

 

[Beans]

View attachment 60611

 

[rompodebailey]

sorry, am I playing this game wrong?

 

[Geordie Blade]

So you're saying that it hit Moose before hitting Zouma? That's a new one at least, everyone else seems to be saying that it hits Zouma and then hits Moose (all without a change of direction on the ball apparently )

As others have said, the GIF going around is an illusion. By the time that Moose's foot gets there it's already gone past him, which is difficult to see on a 2D viewing.

The main thing that give sit away is that Moose hasn't had it changed to be his goal. If he'd just scored his first Premiership goal for his new team he'd be shouting about it, the £10k goal bonus he'd be due would also play a part as well

The change in direction of the ball isn't captured because of the frame rate. Zouma's 'clearance' would have gone about one inch before it rebounded off Mousset's boot, and as that speed, the separate frames don't quite capture the back-and-forth. You can see a slight jerk at that point though (when clicking one frame at a time.

As for him not claiming it: (i) who says he hasn't, and (ii) maybe he genuinely isn't arsed as long as the team gets what they want. I imagine that goal bonuses are paid out on things like that anyway, as they wouldn't want to piss off a player over a matter of millimeters.

All that said, I'm not fussed either way! Normally I'd prefer the Blades player to get the goal but, all considered, I'd have no objections if the FA changed Deano's goal on 17/11/91 to "Woods og".

 

[PokerBlade]

The change in direction of the ball isn't captured because of the frame rate. Zouma's 'clearance' would have gone about one inch before it rebounded off Mousset's boot, and as that speed, the separate frames don't quite capture the back-and-forth. You can see a slight jerk at that point though (when clicking one frame at a time.

2:38, move frame by frame. It absolutely does not rebound off Zouma onto Mousset.

 

[BladeTillIDie]

Are they still looking into this the goals panel or has it been 100% decided?

 

[Geordie Blade]

2:38, move frame by frame. It absolutely does not rebound off Zouma onto Mousset.

I honestly don't know how you come to that conclusion with such certainty. To me (frame by frame on the angle you suggest), there is a sudden blur at the point where contact is made, which could definitely indicate a double rebound. From other angles on the frame by frame, I see a definition stutter in the ball's trajectory at the same point.

 

[TomHeffernan]

2:38, move frame by frame. It absolutely does not rebound off Zouma onto Mousset.

Look at it again mate. It clearly comes of Zoumas shin on to the BOTTOM of Mousetts foot

 

[PokerBlade]

I honestly don't know how you come to that conclusion with such certainty. To me (frame by frame on the angle you suggest), there is a sudden blur at the point where contact is made, which could definitely indicate a double rebound. From other angles on the frame by frame, I see a definition stutter in the ball's trajectory at the same point.

Because I already posted the other angle and timestamp at which you can see there's no change in direction and at which there's clear daylight between Mousset's boot and the ball at all times.

 

[Geordie Blade]

Because I already posted the other angle and timestamp at which you can see there's no change in direction and at which there's clear daylight between Mousset's boot and the ball at all times.

[This is the most pointless argument ever , but...] my point was that the change in direction - and contact with Moose's foot - might have happened between frames. So, whilst there might be clear daylight in the frame-by-frame shots, I don't believe we can be absolutely sure one way or the other. I also happen to disagree about the 'clear' daylight. It looks quite blurry to me (again, because of the frame rate and exposure).

 

[PokerBlade]

[This is the most pointless argument ever , but...] my point was that the change in direction - and contact with Moose's foot - might have happened between frames. So, whilst there might be clear daylight in the frame-by-frame shots, I don't believe we can be absolutely sure one way or the other. I also happen to disagree about the 'clear' daylight. It looks quite blurry to me (again, because of the frame rate and exposure).

You can just suppose that he moved the ball with his mind while you're making up ideas, but multiple angles can be frozen to show he doesn't touch it with his foot. It misses Mousset and comes off Zouma's shin.

 

[Deadbat]

They are not going to change it now I dont think whatever we think - it seems pretty clear it was on own goal to me

The slowed down version gives the impression it was kicked towards Mousset by Zouma and then back in -but the pace of the cross means if that had happeded it would have been quite clear - a ricochet away from goal and then back towards goal but Zouma was the most further placed and thus the touch seems quit clearly to loop up off Zouma.

From nearly every angle slowed down (apart from the one shown behind the goal on the far side where it suggests it hit Mousset after Zouma and I think is quite decetive due to the slowing down and angle) it seems to be quite clearly off Zouma.

6 or 7 angles v 1 angle means the evidence is quite overwhelming as on own goal. If it was cricket; they would not change it and the Premier League are not going to change it either.

It does not matter that much. Hopefully he will score soon enough.

 

[WhiteHawk]

For all I care, it could have come off Barkleys bollocks or Azpilicuetas arse.

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

Think some folk need to book a trip to the opticians. It doesn't touch Mousset at any point.