|
|
Post by nickstoreyno1 on May 7, 2019 18:56:38 GMT
What do u think?? Camera angle makes it look behind the line, but looking at Dicksons position that wasn't over the line surely??
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve47 on May 7, 2019 19:06:39 GMT
Not a goal, no way the whole ball crossed the line there......cheated!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Choirboy Dave on May 7, 2019 19:25:30 GMT
Even at full speed, it clearly isn't anywhere near the line, let alone over it.
Only one person in the ground decided to flag that it was and the referee decided, without talking to flaggy, that who would go with it.
Such is your lot when most officials, (not just this match but all season) appear not to like you.
We had chances had we scored two of them, not even, my perceived bias of the match officials, would have mattered. Let alone a goal that never was even close to being in the front of the net, let alone the back of it
|
|
|
|
Post by scorpio on May 7, 2019 21:25:31 GMT
A guy jumps out of an aeroplane and is struggling to open his parachute when he spots somebody heading up towards him sat on a cooker. He shouts out to him in desperation "Do you know anything about parachutes!". To which the other guy replies "I was going to ask you the same question about gas stoves". Who knows who we will be passing this time next year- surely not the play-off winners.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on May 8, 2019 9:56:11 GMT
The telling thing is the reaction of the neutrals behind the goal. Look at the two older blokes at the top (the bearded one I know is a groundhopper) shaking their heads as the discuss it!
|
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on May 8, 2019 10:02:48 GMT
It is a funny old game. I can still feel the gut wrenching feelings of despair when we lost to Corby. It lasted weeks. I can still feel the hurt when we lost to Gosport in the Play-off final. It hurt for a long while but in both cases you could not argue with the result. The goals that beat us were scored fair and square. This is different because at full speed there is no way the lino could be 100% sure.At the end of the day it is the referee's decision and so the buck stops there.
|
|
|
|
Post by BD on May 9, 2019 10:28:44 GMT
It is a funny old game. I can still feel the gut wrenching feelings of despair when we lost to Corby. It lasted weeks. I can still feel the hurt when we lost to Gosport in the Play-off final. It hurt for a long while but in both cases you could not argue with the result. The goals that beat us were scored fair and square. This is different because at full speed there is no way the lino could be 100% sure.At the end of the day it is the referee's decision and so the buck stops there. The assistant had to be 100% sure it went over the line, otherwise he wouldn't have signalled that it did. First point. The second point regarding the award of the goal is not just down to the referee's decision. The referee from his position could not award the goal, it was impossible for him to see, that is why the assistant was there. When the Met claimed it was in, my first instinct was to look to the assistant, as did the Referee, the assistant signalled, the goal was given. If there was any doubt the assistant would not have signalled for a goal. So it isn't just the referee's decision, it was team work and trust in the his assistant. The assistant gave the goal, the referee just confirmed It. |
|
|
|
Post by ryanstorey999 on May 9, 2019 14:51:22 GMT
The assistant had to be 100% sure it went over the line, otherwise he wouldn't have signalled that it did. First point. The second point regarding the award of the goal is not just down to the referee's decision. The referee from his position could not award the goal, it was impossible for him to see, that is why the assistant was there. When the Met claimed it was in, my first instinct was to look to the assistant, as did the Referee, the assistant signalled, the goal was given. If there was any doubt the assistant would not have signalled for a goal. So it isn't just the referee's decision, it was team work and trust in the his assistant. The assistant gave the goal, the referee just confirmed It. The thing that sparked the outrage was that the linesman was half way down the touchline when he gave the decision, absolutely no angle whatsoever to make a justified decision on whether the ball crossed the line. He should be perpendicular to where the ball is at the time, not half way down the touch line. And if in doubt, you should always give to the defending team, especially when their entire season is at stake. And either way, the ball doesn't cross the line at all so there's no way the linesman could be completely sure about it, because it just didn't happen. Another dead giveaway are the 2 older blokes behind the goal clearly talking about the situation and how it wasn't a goal. |
|
|
|
Post by BD on May 9, 2019 17:44:46 GMT
The assistant had to be 100% sure it went over the line, otherwise he wouldn't have signalled that it did. First point. The second point regarding the award of the goal is not just down to the referee's decision. The referee from his position could not award the goal, it was impossible for him to see, that is why the assistant was there. When the Met claimed it was in, my first instinct was to look to the assistant, as did the Referee, the assistant signalled, the goal was given. If there was any doubt the assistant would not have signalled for a goal. So it isn't just the referee's decision, it was team work and trust in the his assistant. The assistant gave the goal, the referee just confirmed It. The thing that sparked the outrage was that the linesman was half way down the touchline when he gave the decision, absolutely no angle whatsoever to make a justified decision on whether the ball crossed the line. He should be perpendicular to where the ball is at the time, not half way down the touch line. And if in doubt, you should always give to the defending team, especially when their entire season is at stake. And either way, the ball doesn't cross the line at all so there's no way the linesman could be completely sure about it, because it just didn't happen. Another dead giveaway are the 2 older blokes behind the goal clearly talking about the situation and how it wasn't a goal. First point to correct you on is that the assistant wasn't halfway down the the touchline, that would position him at the halfway line. Secondly, he wasn't in doubt. If he was he wouldn't have signalled a goal had been scored. Fact. Thirdly, I would rather take the judgement of a qualified appointed official rather than two old blokes behind the goal. |
|
|
|
Post by nickstoreyno1 on May 9, 2019 18:59:04 GMT
Just to confirm, the lineo was about 10 meters off the goal line. He couldn't have seen the incident from where he was. Listen to the audio on the video clip. More than one person can be heard questioning the officials position when the 'goal' was scored.
|
|
|
|
Post by BD on May 9, 2019 19:39:46 GMT
Just to confirm, the lineo was about 10 meters off the goal line. He couldn't have seen the incident from where he was. Listen to the audio on the video clip. More than one person can be heard questioning the officials position when the 'goal' was scored. 10 metres? Wrong again. Assistant referees have to be in line with the 2nd rear most defender in order to be able to judge offside, if he was 10 meters off, that would position him closer to the penalty spot, there were two defenders, including the one attempting to clear the ball in the 6 yard box, so, at worst it would mean the assistant was approximately 4-5yrds off the goal line. Note I said 'at worst', that doesn't mean he was that much off. As regards to those questioning the decision, that has no bearing or relevance to whether it is over the line or not, what it does mean is that they are not even sure so how can you even consider their opinions over the official who is in a better position to make that call? |
|
|
|
Post by nickstoreyno1 on May 9, 2019 19:52:01 GMT
Which he wasn't 4 - 5 yards off the last defender. I immediately looked at the lineo even before the header was played by Mazzone. The linesman wasn't even up with play from the initial attack, so how he can see if the ball crossed the line from his position is impossible.
|
|
|
|
Post by BD on May 9, 2019 20:43:10 GMT
So where was he? One minute you are saying hes halfway up touch line, then hes 10 metres, but hes not 4 or 5 yards, maybe somewhere in between. If you dont know where he is, how can you judge whether the ball crossed the line?
|
|
|
|
Post by parky64 on May 10, 2019 5:49:27 GMT
It was a gutser! It was given! We lost! Move on!
|
|
|
|
Post by nickstoreyno1 on May 10, 2019 9:10:26 GMT
I agree parky. I could not see from where I was and, unfortunately for us neither could the linesman. We lost and we will go again stronger next season.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on May 10, 2019 20:26:41 GMT
It was a gutser! It was given! We lost! Move on! Yes I agree. It does not matter now, we move on. |
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on May 10, 2019 20:38:46 GMT
Just to confirm, the lineo was about 10 meters off the goal line. He couldn't have seen the incident from where he was. Listen to the audio on the video clip. More than one person can be heard questioning the officials position when the 'goal' was scored. 10 metres? Wrong again. Assistant referees have to be in line with the 2nd rear most defender in order to be able to judge offside, if he was 10 meters off, that would position him closer to the penalty spot, there were two defenders, including the one attempting to clear the ball in the 6 yard box, so, at worst it would mean the assistant was approximately 4-5yrds off the goal line. Note I said 'at worst', that doesn't mean he was that much off. As regards to those questioning the decision, that has no bearing or relevance to whether it is over the line or not, what it does mean is that they are not even sure so how can you even consider their opinions over the official who is in a better position to make that call? Having said we should move on, if the Assistant was not straddling the line, he could not have seen whether the ball was over the line. That is not opinion it’s maths. The goal post would have obscured his view. However as I said it is all irrelevant as when it mattered, the Assistant was sure he was right. He was in a better position than the ref. Also we did not lose it on that one decision, we lost it before Christmas. |
|
|
|
Post by dave2 on May 11, 2019 16:51:02 GMT
Tonbridge win 3-2 after extra time. met Police scored 2 then Tonbridge 1 and then another just before FT. So in Extra time gave Tonbridge the winner.
|
|
|
|
Post by expat on May 11, 2019 17:19:11 GMT
thx Dave. Have to agree with John A. Our abysmal start to the season cost us. Strengthen the team and lets get back to where we belonhg!
|
|
|
|
Post by graygraeme on May 11, 2019 20:10:20 GMT
10 metres? Wrong again. Assistant referees have to be in line with the 2nd rear most defender in order to be able to judge offside, if he was 10 meters off, that would position him closer to the penalty spot, there were two defenders, including the one attempting to clear the ball in the 6 yard box, so, at worst it would mean the assistant was approximately 4-5yrds off the goal line. Note I said 'at worst', that doesn't mean he was that much off. As regards to those questioning the decision, that has no bearing or relevance to whether it is over the line or not, what it does mean is that they are not even sure so how can you even consider their opinions over the official who is in a better position to make that call? Having said we should move on, if the Assistant was not straddling the line, he could not have seen whether the ball was over the line. That is not opinion it’s maths. The goal post would have obscured his view. However as I said it is all irrelevant as when it mattered, the Assistant was sure he was right. He was in a better position than the ref. Also we did not lose it on that one decision, we lost it before Christmas. When I looked across he WAS in line with the penalty spot |
|
|
|
Post by nickstoreyno1 on May 12, 2019 14:37:19 GMT
10 metres? Wrong again. Assistant referees have to be in line with the 2nd rear most defender in order to be able to judge offside, if he was 10 meters off, that would position him closer to the penalty spot, there were two defenders, including the one attempting to clear the ball in the 6 yard box, so, at worst it would mean the assistant was approximately 4-5yrds off the goal line. Note I said 'at worst', that doesn't mean he was that much off. As regards to those questioning the decision, that has no bearing or relevance to whether it is over the line or not, what it does mean is that they are not even sure so how can you even consider their opinions over the official who is in a better position to make that call? Having said we should move on, if the Assistant was not straddling the line, he could not have seen whether the ball was over the line. That is not opinion it’s maths. The goal post would have obscured his view. However as I said it is all irrelevant as when it mattered, the Assistant was sure he was right. He was in a better position than the ref. Also we did not lose it on that one decision, we lost it before Christmas. Looking back I think my heart was ruling my head. Frustration in being so close to call. Bring on next season!!! |
|
