| Question on the penalty 21:22 - Apr 11 with 3024 views | Illinoisblue |
How was it described on Sky? The (English) commentator on the CBS coverage here didn’t even realize it was a penalty. Watching a scum vlog filmed from the other end, and the ref is trotting away from the incident when he suddenly stops and goes back to the scene of the crime. Did he get a nod or notification from the linesman? I’d have been foomin at a pen given us against us in that way. As it is, can’t stop laughing 😃😃😃 |  |
| |  |
| Question on the penalty on 08:13 - Apr 12 with 347 views | Blue_In_Boston |
| Question on the penalty on 07:52 - Apr 12 by Benters |
It was definitely one of those if it had been given against Towen we would have been fuming.
But there you go  |
That is how I always judge a decision. Would be livid if it was given against us. For all those saying Taylor was kicked through, where? Sky couldn't see any touch in their half time analysis, and I have to agree.
It is a beautiful moment when dodgy decisions that we have been on the end of go our way in the derby. Enjoy it for what it is, being a shocking decision makes it even more pleasurable. |  | | |
| Described as not a penalty on 08:22 - Apr 12 with 330 views | Dyland |
At the time we all agreed. Seemed incredibly soft. VAR would've spent an age reviewing it. I thought if anything Taylor had fouled their bloke. But what do I know eh?
The ref bottled it with second yellows for both Leif and Marcellino and if that had been the other way around we'd all be spitting feathers. Also missed some rather low behaviour from certain Norwich players, not least on Leif that led to his impetuous next ten odd minutes. And how McLean stayed on the pitch is anyone's guess.
As others have commented, we've had some big decisions given/not given that may haver cost us valuable points so meh. And it was at Carrot Rud so as if anyl Town fans give a flying one, arf! |  |
| |
| Question on the penalty on 08:28 - Apr 12 with 307 views | Herbivore |
| Question on the penalty on 07:55 - Apr 12 by breezy_runner |
I can't believe there is any debate on this one. Its a stone wall penalty. The guy foot was so high and could be deemed as dangerous play. The only debate should be why it took the linesman to give it and not the ref straight away |
Dangerous play is penalised by an indirect freekick so if we're saying it's dangerous play it shouldn't have been a penalty.
For me it's a soft one but we had an even softer one against us at Stoke so this might be an instance of decisions evening themselves out. |  |
| |
| Question on the penalty on 09:11 - Apr 12 with 275 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Question on the penalty on 07:55 - Apr 12 by breezy_runner |
I can't believe there is any debate on this one. Its a stone wall penalty. The guy foot was so high and could be deemed as dangerous play. The only debate should be why it took the linesman to give it and not the ref straight away |
According to Sky, the ref didn’t see the incident.
That must be the third of fourth time we’ve had refs “not see” incidents in our games alone. |  |
| |
| Described as not a penalty on 10:08 - Apr 12 with 230 views | monty_radio |
| Described as not a penalty on 08:22 - Apr 12 by Dyland |
At the time we all agreed. Seemed incredibly soft. VAR would've spent an age reviewing it. I thought if anything Taylor had fouled their bloke. But what do I know eh?
The ref bottled it with second yellows for both Leif and Marcellino and if that had been the other way around we'd all be spitting feathers. Also missed some rather low behaviour from certain Norwich players, not least on Leif that led to his impetuous next ten odd minutes. And how McLean stayed on the pitch is anyone's guess.
As others have commented, we've had some big decisions given/not given that may haver cost us valuable points so meh. And it was at Carrot Rud so as if anyl Town fans give a flying one, arf! |
"The ref bottled it with second yellows for both Leif and Marcellino"
But he did the same for Stacey too. | |
| |
| Described as not a penalty on 10:11 - Apr 12 with 224 views | Herbivore |
| Described as not a penalty on 10:08 - Apr 12 by monty_radio |
"The ref bottled it with second yellows for both Leif and Marcellino"
But he did the same for Stacey too. |
And a couple of others on their team. Darling and McLean on another day could have gone, arguably Mattson too. | |
| |
| Aye, as I said innit on 10:19 - Apr 12 with 204 views | Dyland |
| Described as not a penalty on 10:11 - Apr 12 by Herbivore |
And a couple of others on their team. Darling and McLean on another day could have gone, arguably Mattson too. |
McLean was especially lucky.
Leif kicking the ball away was clear cut though. And lol his first yellow! It was literally like a playground game when someone fouls you and you run after them and push them over. He lost his head. And yeh, there were mitigating circumstances (was it Mattson who'd grabbed him round the neck and looked to have a wee claw at Leif's face?) but you can't react like that. Well, you can, but then to kick the ball away is silly. | |
| |
| Question on the penalty on 10:32 - Apr 12 with 188 views | WinchBlue |
| Question on the penalty on 08:28 - Apr 12 by Herbivore |
Dangerous play is penalised by an indirect freekick so if we're saying it's dangerous play it shouldn't have been a penalty.
For me it's a soft one but we had an even softer one against us at Stoke so this might be an instance of decisions evening themselves out. |
Dangerous play with contact is a direct free kick or penalty. I haven’t got the technology that they’ve got in their studios, but it seemed to me that his foot was about 5’ in the air & it made contact with his arm and chest.
Having said that, their guy couldn’t see Jacks challenge coming in and just tried to put his foot through the ball (& missed). Can’t see what else he could have done so yes - pretty harsh. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Question on the penalty on 10:39 - Apr 12 with 179 views | Herbivore |
| Question on the penalty on 10:32 - Apr 12 by WinchBlue |
Dangerous play with contact is a direct free kick or penalty. I haven’t got the technology that they’ve got in their studios, but it seemed to me that his foot was about 5’ in the air & it made contact with his arm and chest.
Having said that, their guy couldn’t see Jacks challenge coming in and just tried to put his foot through the ball (& missed). Can’t see what else he could have done so yes - pretty harsh. |
The contact is very slight and comes when he's already going down. I think it's maybe given outside the area, possibly as dangerous play rather than a foul, but would be annoyed if we conceded it. That said, it's no worse than the one Stoke got against us and goes some way to compensating from a number of stonewall pens we've not been given. | |
| |
| Question on the penalty on 11:14 - Apr 12 with 144 views | GeoffSentence |
I don't know about Sky, but this is from the NCFC official highlights
 |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
