Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2016 19:20:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Langford Gas on Feb 28, 2016 19:25:28 GMT
Its Norburn, it was a pass back !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2016 19:27:16 GMT
It was rightly allowed but Guiseley should have let them score.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2016 19:51:29 GMT
It was rightly allowed but Guiseley should have let them score. Agree,it happened in a Yeovil match if I remember correctly,and Yeovil let them score |
|
|
|
Post by fanboy on Feb 29, 2016 8:32:09 GMT
Bloody hell thats seriously harsh not to let them score.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 29, 2016 8:47:52 GMT
It was a moving ball when Norborn kick it so should never been allowed in the first place, but why didn't just let them score Guiseley from the kick off as Fanboy suggested?
|
|
|
|
Post by fanboy on Feb 29, 2016 8:50:33 GMT
It was a moving ball when Norborn kick it so should never been allowed in the first place, but why didn't just let them score Guiseley from the kick off as Fanboy suggested? Think it was from a throw, so someone threw it to him - therefore technically it should stand but it's seriously poor from the other team not to allow them to score. |
|
|
|
Post by scoobydoogas on Feb 29, 2016 8:53:03 GMT
Given how close Braintree are to the playoffs, I wonder how costly those two lost points will be at the end of the season. They would only be outside playoffs now on goal difference if the goal hadn't stood.
|
|
|
|
Post by midlandgas213 on Feb 29, 2016 9:56:02 GMT
I remember Arsenal scoring like this in a FA cup game and Wenger offered a replay which was agreed and the game was replayed . don't know if they are likely to do the same here
|
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Mar 1, 2016 1:40:36 GMT
It was a moving ball when Norborn kick it so should never been allowed in the first place, but why didn't just let them score Guiseley from the kick off as Fanboy suggested? Think it was from a throw, so someone threw it to him - therefore technically it should stand but it's seriously poor from the other team not to allow them to score. It's really not... after their player was injured Braintree played on and had a shot on goal....he could have put it out (to allow treatment) but didn't. Play continues, the referee still doesn't stop play (as per the rules) and eventually Braintree gain position in the defensive third and put it out of play. The Braintree keeper then misjudges what is basically a back-pass... They already took their chance to score whilst their player was injured. Harsh but fair in my opinion, and since we've seen our fair share of opposition players going down and staying down for no real reason this season, playing to the whistle is completely justified and (in this instance) lobbing their keeper isn't bad form.... |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Mar 1, 2016 8:23:33 GMT
It's really not... after their player was injured Braintree played on and had a shot on goal....he could have put it out (to allow treatment) but didn't. Play continues, the referee still doesn't stop play (as per the rules) and eventually Braintree gain position in the defensive third and put it out of play. The Braintree keeper then misjudges what is basically a back-pass... Didn't realise that. Istm that the putting-it-out-when-a-player's-injured thing is used to gain an advantage, more often than it's used to help the opponent. Either by playing on, and then expecting the opposition to put it out (as you describe) or by faking it to slow the game down. When there's a genuinely serious incident, usually players realise and are quick to stop the game, or the ref stops it. The 'gentlemen's agreement' thing has become so cynical and exploitable it's virtually meaningless. Istm much better to just play to the whistle and never give the ball back. If there's a drop ball either agree with your opponent whether you will compete for it, or not, but don't expect the ball to be given to you. |
|
|
|
Post by pirate49 on Mar 1, 2016 8:27:13 GMT
It was rightly allowed but Guiseley should have let them score. Agree,it happened in a Yeovil match if I remember correctly,and Yeovil let them score |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Mar 1, 2016 11:16:14 GMT
Injury happens at 6.32, their player has a shot at 6.42...
|
|
