" Malky Mackay not happy "

Where has my post gone

The goal was rightly disallowed surely, he started to celebrate as he was still riding on the defenders back

Also id be interested to see a still of the Lloris decision. In real time it looked ok to me, close, but ok. On the line is regarded as in the box so any part of the ball touching the line is ok to handle.

It wasn't disallowed for anything turner did, it was gunner's actions with the keeper

Where has my post gone

The goal was rightly disallowed surely, he started to celebrate as he was still riding on the defenders back

Also id be interested to see a still of the Lloris decision. In real time it looked ok to me, close, but ok. On the line is regarded as in the box so any part of the ball touching the line is ok to handle.

It wasn't disallowed for anything turner did, it was gunner's actions with the keeper

Doesnt matter, he was balancing on the defnders back and shoulders as he scored, he climbed all over him.

Its like complaining a goal was disallowed for handball which was contensious even though he was way offside anyway. Eitherway you look at it, it wasnt a goal.

Where has my post gone

The goal was rightly disallowed surely, he started to celebrate as he was still riding on the defenders back

Also id be interested to see a still of the Lloris decision. In real time it looked ok to me, close, but ok. On the line is regarded as in the box so any part of the ball touching the line is ok to handle.

It wasn't disallowed for anything turner did, it was gunner's actions with the keeper

Doesnt matter, he was balancing on the defnders back and shoulders as he scored, he climbed all over him.

Its like complaining a goal was disallowed for handball which was contensious even though he was way offside anyway. Eitherway you look at it, it wasnt a goal.

Indeed. The ref blew up for the foul on the keeper before Turner climbed all over the defender, which the ref would have blown up for if he hadn't already.

Where has my post gone

The goal was rightly disallowed surely, he started to celebrate as he was still riding on the defenders back

Also id be interested to see a still of the Lloris decision. In real time it looked ok to me, close, but ok. On the line is regarded as in the box so any part of the ball touching the line is ok to handle.

It wasn't disallowed for anything turner did, it was gunner's actions with the keeper

Doesnt matter, he was balancing on the defnders back and shoulders as he scored, he climbed all over him.

Its like complaining a goal was disallowed for handball which was contensious even though he was way offside anyway. Eitherway you look at it, it wasnt a goal.

In your opinion, not in mine. Not seen any media reporting that suggested it was a foul by turner either. Some fans assumed it was at the time but that's because the actual foul by gunner was difficult to spot. The only thing for sure is that we will never know.

In your opinion, not in mine. Not seen any media reporting that suggested it was a foul by turner either. Some fans assumed it was at the time but that's because the actual foul by gunner was difficult to spot. The only thing for sure is that we will never know.

Why do you need media to confirm? Just use your eyes. It isnt an opinion.

It is an offense to use a player for leverage when going for a ball. Thats clearly what he was doing and thats being kind... unless of course he was hovering by sheer super will power - while appearing, but not actually to be lying on the defenders back and shoulders (maybe by creating a hologram) .

Come on now.

In your opinion, not in mine. Not seen any media reporting that suggested it was a foul by turner either. Some fans assumed it was at the time but that's because the actual foul by gunner was difficult to spot. The only thing for sure is that we will never know.

Why do you need media to confirm? Just use your eyes. It isnt an opinion.

It is an offense to use a player for leverage when going for a ball. Thats clearly what he was doing and thats being kind... unless of course he was hovering by sheer super will power - while appearing, but not actually to be lying in the defenders back and shoulders.

Come on now.

I gave my opinion, whilst able to do so without sarcasm. Then supported it with the fact that nobody in the media has pointed to a turner foul. Dawson made no attempt to win the ball, was more intent on backing into turner as the corner was too deep for him to get his head on it. The same situation further up the field between a centre half and a striker backing in would see the centre half get the verdict 9/10 times.

Ill agree to differ.

Where has my post gone

The goal was rightly disallowed surely, he started to celebrate as he was still riding on the defenders back

Also id be interested to see a still of the Lloris decision. In real time it looked ok to me, close, but ok. On the line is regarded as in the box so any part of the ball touching the line is ok to handle.

It wasn't disallowed for anything turner did, it was gunner's actions with the keeper

Doesnt matter, he was balancing on the defnders back and shoulders as he scored, he climbed all over him.

Its like complaining a goal was disallowed for handball which was contensious even though he was way offside anyway. Eitherway you look at it, it wasnt a goal.

Indeed. The ref blew up for the foul on the keeper before Turner climbed all over the defender, which the ref would have blown up for if he hadn't already.

And you know this how?

Where has my post gone

The goal was rightly disallowed surely, he started to celebrate as he was still riding on the defenders back

Also id be interested to see a still of the Lloris decision. In real time it looked ok to me, close, but ok. On the line is regarded as in the box so any part of the ball touching the line is ok to handle.

It wasn't disallowed for anything turner did, it was gunner's actions with the keeper

Doesnt matter, he was balancing on the defnders back and shoulders as he scored, he climbed all over him.

Its like complaining a goal was disallowed for handball which was contensious even though he was way offside anyway. Eitherway you look at it, it wasnt a goal.

Indeed. The ref blew up for the foul on the keeper before Turner climbed all over the defender, which the ref would have blown up for if he hadn't already.

And you know this how?

It's my opinion.

Where has my post gone

The goal was rightly disallowed surely, he started to celebrate as he was still riding on the defenders back

Also id be interested to see a still of the Lloris decision. In real time it looked ok to me, close, but ok. On the line is regarded as in the box so any part of the ball touching the line is ok to handle.

It wasn't disallowed for anything turner did, it was gunner's actions with the keeper

Doesnt matter, he was balancing on the defnders back and shoulders as he scored, he climbed all over him.

Its like complaining a goal was disallowed for handball which was contensious even though he was way offside anyway. Eitherway you look at it, it wasnt a goal.

Indeed. The ref blew up for the foul on the keeper before Turner climbed all over the defender, which the ref would have blown up for if he hadn't already.

And you know this how?

It's my opinion.

Fair enough, truth is if it was your lot I'd probably be claiming the same

I gave my opinion, whilst able to do so without sarcasm. Then supported it with the fact that nobody in the media has pointed to a turner foul. Dawson made no attempt to win the ball, was more intent on backing into turner as the corner was too deep for him to get his head on it. The same situation further up the field between a centre half and a striker backing in would see the centre half get the verdict 9/10 times.

Ill agree to differ.

I wasnt being sarcastic, i was telling you the rules of the game and what happened on the pitch and linked them. I told you the fact media hasn't reported it is irrelevant. The goal was disallowed prior to that.

The defender is within his rights to move towards the ball, an offence of "backing in" occurs when the opponent is in the air as its deemed as dangerous. This isnt what happened in this example however as the video shows your player started his jump as the defender had stopped his backward movement. what isnt allowed however is using another player to use an advantage to get the ball, this is exactly what happened.

You can say its your opinion all you like but it doesnt require opinion. We all know the rules (or at least should do) and everyone can see what happened in the video. It was therefore rightly disallowed.

I gave my opinion, whilst able to do so without sarcasm. Then supported it with the fact that nobody in the media has pointed to a turner foul. Dawson made no attempt to win the ball, was more intent on backing into turner as the corner was too deep for him to get his head on it. The same situation further up the field between a centre half and a striker backing in would see the centre half get the verdict 9/10 times.

Ill agree to differ.

I wasnt being sarcastic, i was telling you the rules of the game and what happened on the pitch and linked them. I told you the fact media hasn't reported it is irrelevant. The goal was disallowed prior to that.

The defender is within his rights to move towards the ball, an offence of "backing in" occurs when the opponent is in the air as its deemed as dangerous. This isnt what happened in this example however as the video shows your player started his jump as the defender had stopped his backward movement. what isnt allowed however is using another player to use an advantage to get the ball, this is exactly what happened.

You can say its your opinion all you like but it doesnt require opinion. We all know the rules (or at least should do) and everyone can see what happened in the video. It was therefore rightly disallowed.

So by your argument, there wont be any more refereeing controversy since we all know the rules and everyone can see what happens in a game. Football is no longer a game of opinions

It's all irrelevant as the goal was rightly disallowed for the foul on Loris. Shame he was still in the pitch.

I'm sticking with my opinion, ill leave you to yours.

So by your argument, there wont be any more refereeing controversy since we all know the rules and everyone can see what happens in a game. Football is no longer a game of opinions

It's all irrelevant as the goal was rightly disallowed for the foul on Loris. Shame he was still in the pitch.

I'm sticking with my opinion, ill leave you to yours.

Nope, not at all. Football is all anout opinions when things cant be interpreted as black or white. However, this case is pretty straight forward. You are currently advocating the like of me saying paulinho handled the ball over the line to be fine even though video evidence proves otherwise all in the name of "having an opinion"

The goal was rightly disallowed. You think dawson was backing in, however the video shows he wasnt backing in by the time your player jumped for it. Therefore the offence was not backing in but boarding, whoch is an offence against the attacking side on this occasion.

All for opinions, however in a case like this (just like the paulinho phantom hand ball) - opinions are rendered useless due to video evidence of the incident, he wasnt backing in, thus was boarding as he ended up on dawsons back and shoulders.

What are you going on about? I never said Dawson had committed an offence, just that he was backing in to turner. My view is that turner didn't commit any foul - he went for the ball whilst Dawson made no attempt as his positioning was wrong.

Go off on all the tangents you want with your phantom goal nonsense, but it's my opinion. Your opinion doesn't become fact because you say it is.

Ill end as I started - ill agree to differ.

What are you going on about? I never said Dawson had committed an offence, just that he was backing in to turner. My view is that turner didn't commit any foul - he went for the ball whilst Dawson made no attempt as his positioning was wrong.

Go off on all the tangents you want with your phantom goal nonsense, but it's my opinion. Your opinion doesn't become fact because you say it is.

Ill end as I started - ill agree to differ.

What?

So you are now saying Turner balancing on the back of Dawson is not a foul? What?

As i said, opinion isnt necessary. Its in the rule book (its called boarding) and unless you think Hudson has the ability to hover while making it look like hes using the other player as leverage then IT IS a foul.

And stop referring to is as MY opinion. Its not my opinion, its the rules of football.

It was definately over the line Roath but as Mackay says, it doesn't matter as Campbell should have chipped him or just gone the other way.

It was definately over the line Roath but as Mackay says, it doesn't matter as Campbell should have chipped him or just gone the other way.

Yeah polo told me yesterday MOTD proved it was over the line. Im not going to dispute it as ive only seen real time clips.

But in this league the border line decisions rarely get given, especially ones that turns the game on their head, refs are under the microscope. Not sure if its this thread or another i mentioned it, forgive me if its this one and im repeating, but we havent been awarded a penalty since our debut season in the orem and are now in our 3rd. And as you guys have seen even blatent ones go unpunished with the Baines and Medel one (i think it was medel anyway).

Yet the big vlubs seem to dive or go down easily and get them, thought that notion was nonsense until we actually got here.

What are you going on about? I never said Dawson had committed an offence, just that he was backing in to turner. My view is that turner didn't commit any foul - he went for the ball whilst Dawson made no attempt as his positioning was wrong.

Go off on all the tangents you want with your phantom goal nonsense, but it's my opinion. Your opinion doesn't become fact because you say it is.

Ill end as I started - ill agree to differ.

What?

So you are now saying Turner balancing on the back of Dawson is not a foul? What?

As i said, opinion isnt necessary. Its in the rule book (its called boarding) and unless you think Hudson has the ability to hover while making it look like hes using the other player as leverage then IT IS a foul.

And stop referring to is MY opinion. Its not my opinion, its the rules of football.

It is your opinion as no decision was actually taken or even referred to so we can only make our own judgement. There are rules, but it comes down to the refs opinion when they take effect. Fans, players, managers and the media have an opinion as to whether he applied them correctly. My opinion is that turner didnt foul and dawson made no attempt to play the ball. Your opinion is he fouled Dawson. Fair enough. It's no big deal, its football. Get over it

As for Hudson, he can walk on water. Shame he was on the bench

It was definately over the line Roath but as Mackay says, it doesn't matter as Campbell should have chipped him or just gone the other way.

Yeah polo told me yesterday MOTD proved it was over the line. Im not going to dispute it as ive only seen real time clips.

But in this league the border line decisions rarely get given, especially ones that turns the game on their head, refs are under the microscope. Not sure if its this thread or another i mentioned it, forgive me if its this one and im repeating, but we havent been awarded a penalty since our debut season in the orem and are now in our 3rd. And as you guys have seen even blatent ones go unpunished with the Baines and Medel one (i think it was medel anyway).

Yet the big vlubs seem to dive or go down easily and get them, thought that notion was nonsense until we actually got here.

What penalties should you have had then?

What are you going on about? I never said Dawson had committed an offence, just that he was backing in to turner. My view is that turner didn't commit any foul - he went for the ball whilst Dawson made no attempt as his positioning was wrong.

Go off on all the tangents you want with your phantom goal nonsense, but it's my opinion. Your opinion doesn't become fact because you say it is.

Ill end as I started - ill agree to differ.

What?

So you are now saying Turner balancing on the back of Dawson is not a foul? What?

As i said, opinion isnt necessary. Its in the rule book (its called boarding) and unless you think Hudson has the ability to hover while making it look like hes using the other player as leverage then IT IS a foul.

And stop referring to is MY opinion. Its not my opinion, its the rules of football.

It is your opinion as no decision was actually taken or even referred to so we can only make our own judgement. There are rules, but it comes down to the refs opinion when they take effect. Fans, players, managers and the media have an opinion as to whether he applied them correctly. My opinion is that turner didnt foul and dawson made no attempt to play the ball. Your opinion is he fouled Dawson. Fair enough. It's no big deal, its football. Get over it

As for Hudson, he can walk on water. Shame he was on the bench

This is where we are at a cross roads my friend. Im not stating my opinion, im telling you that in football it is an offence to use a player as leverage especially when you are restricting his movement. This os a fact, not an opinion.

So to disagree with this you must be of the opinion that he didnt use him as leverage, hence why i was sarcastic in my opening post regarding him having the superpower of hovering. He clearly did and was still on Dawsons back as he celebrated the goal.

He boarded him, which is an offence, which makes the goal illigitimate even if it had got to the point where the geadr was still in active play. This is mot my opinion, these are the rules.

What are you going on about? I never said Dawson had committed an offence, just that he was backing in to turner. My view is that turner didn't commit any foul - he went for the ball whilst Dawson made no attempt as his positioning was wrong.

Go off on all the tangents you want with your phantom goal nonsense, but it's my opinion. Your opinion doesn't become fact because you say it is.

Ill end as I started - ill agree to differ.

What?

So you are now saying Turner balancing on the back of Dawson is not a foul? What?

As i said, opinion isnt necessary. Its in the rule book (its called boarding) and unless you think Hudson has the ability to hover while making it look like hes using the other player as leverage then IT IS a foul.

And stop referring to is MY opinion. Its not my opinion, its the rules of football.

It is your opinion as no decision was actually taken or even referred to so we can only make our own judgement. There are rules, but it comes down to the refs opinion when they take effect. Fans, players, managers and the media have an opinion as to whether he applied them correctly. My opinion is that turner didnt foul and dawson made no attempt to play the ball. Your opinion is he fouled Dawson. Fair enough. It's no big deal, its football. Get over it

As for Hudson, he can walk on water. Shame he was on the bench

This is where we are at a cross roads my friend. Im not stating my opinion, im telling you that in football it is an offence to use a player as leverage especially when you are restricting his movement. This os a fact, not an opinion.

So to disagree with this you must be of the opinion that he didnt use him as leverage, hence why i was sarcastic in my opening post regarding him having the superpower of hovering. He clearly did and was still on Dawsons back as he celebrated the goal.

He boarded him, which is an offence, which makes the goal illigitimate even if it had got to the point where the geadr was still in active play. This is mot my opinion, these are the rules.

And I disagree. MOTD were all over the goal and not once did thy mention any foul by turner that surely would have been relevant to the discussion. Rules exist but whether they apply in any given situation is always up for debate. Handball is a simple rule, yet how many differences of opinion has this caused over the years?

You say he fouled, I say he didn't. Opinion. Not going to change.

And I disagree. MOTD were all over the goal and not once did thy mention any foul by turner that surely would have been relevant to the discussion. Rules exist but whether they apply in any given situation is always up for debate. Handball is a simple rule, yet how many differences of opinion has this caused over the years?

You say he fouled, I say he didn't. Opinion. Not going to change.

You disagree about what? That its a foul to climb on the defender to header the ball? Or that he did climb over the defender to get the ball?

The rule book says it is and the video shows he did, so im not sure what you are disagreeing about in honesty.

Why would it have been a discussion point? The ref blew before he stuck it in for a separate foul. Michu stuck a ball in the net after he was offside yet didnt even make the highlight package.

And I disagree. MOTD were all over the goal and not once did thy mention any foul by turner that surely would have been relevant to the discussion. Rules exist but whether they apply in any given situation is always up for debate. Handball is a simple rule, yet how many differences of opinion has this caused over the years?

You say he fouled, I say he didn't. Opinion. Not going to change.

You disagree about what? That its a foul to climb on the defender to header the ball? Or that he did climb over the defender to get the ball?

The rule book says it is and the video shows he did, so im not sure what you are disagreeing about in honesty.

Why would it have been a discussion point? The ref blew before he stuck it in for a separate foul. Michu stuck a ball in the net after he was offside yet didnt even make the highlight package.

No climbing, no foul.
The discussion was that MM had stated it was a perfectly good goal. The analysis centred on whether it was or not so all reasons why not were relevant. If they had thought turner had fouled it would have been mentioned IMO.

All in my opinion of course. You disagree so let's leave it at that. You think I'm wrong and I can live with it.
Enjoy your day (evening?)

No climbing, no foul.
The discussion was that MM had stated it was a perfectly good goal. The analysis centred on whether it was or not so all reasons why not were relevant. If they had thought turner had fouled it would have been mentioned IMO.

All in my opinion of course. You disagree so let's leave it at that. You think I'm wrong and I can live with it.
Enjoy your day (evening?)

So you are basing your thoughts on what Match of the Day didnt say?

Wouldnt it be better to use your eyes? I refer you to this.... Both hands in the defenders shoulders STILL as the ball is about to hit the back of the net with the defenders shirt being pulled upwards with the grip of Turner. So as i said, unless he can hover and make a hologram of his arms on the defender then its a foul.... and im sure you agree he cant.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

No climbing, no foul.
The discussion was that MM had stated it was a perfectly good goal. The analysis centred on whether it was or not so all reasons why not were relevant. If they had thought turner had fouled it would have been mentioned IMO.

All in my opinion of course. You disagree so let's leave it at that. You think I'm wrong and I can live with it.
Enjoy your day (evening?)

So you are basing your thoughts on what Match of the Day didnt say?

Wouldnt it be better to use your eyes? I refer you to this.... Both hands in the defenders shoulders STILL as the ball is about to hit the back of the net with the defenders shirt being pulled upwards with the grip of Turner. So as i said, unless he can hover and make a hologram of his arms on the defender then its a foul.... and im sure you agree he cant.

A still shot proves nothing. I stand by my opinion.

Oh and not basing my thoughts on Motd, I've made my mind up but referenced the show as support

A still shot proves he was still at the peak of his jump (which the video shows he was prior to heading the ball) as the ball was hitting the back of the net, this is impossible unless Turner was holding himself up, which he clearly was. The picture also depicts Turner with his hands in the defenders shoulders who is buckling under his weight aswell as his shirt riding unnaturally up due to the contact of Turner....And lets not forget, he was still on his back when he started to celebrate

You can hide behind an opinion all you like to avoid facing facts. However using a player for leverage is against the rules of football and he was clearly doing that as pictorial and video evidence proves.

You are currently still in my example of "Paulinho handled it in" even though he clearly didnt yet denying you are wrong because its an opinion.

Im afraid as the picture shows, its a wrong one.

Picture from other angle showing Turner with both hands on the defender. One arm pushing down on the defenders arm and the other coming around his neck all the while being about a meter off the ground

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Picture from other angle showing Turner with both hands on the defender. One arm pushing down on the defenders arm and the other coming around his neck all the while being about a meter off the ground

You can't prove any pushing from a photo. Contact yes, pushing down no. Sorry.

Jack WUM lining you all up again?

He's going to argue the toss with anyone who replies.

Jack WUM lining you all up again?

He's going to argue the toss with anyone who replies.

Don't worry I know that. Just a bit of fun