The fact his hand was behind the line when the ball hit it should have some relevence to it. TV replay on the feed I was watching showed it from a camera on the goalline, presumably one of the ones used for the goal line tech. The ball was about 3/4 over and the hand was behind the ball (as you'd expect when he headed it at it) so for the centre point of the ball to be at the point offence took place the whole ball would be over the line.
I saw the slow motion replay on MOTD and no way was the ball over the line when it touched his hand/arm.
I watched the full match on a stream. And the ref was pretty ****e for me! The amount of times he was in the way or stood infront of a player wanting to receive the ball was laughable. He got all the major points wrong as well. Cattamole didn't ankle tap he kicked out and it was a lot more malicious: Red without question. Brown made a great tackle: No free kick or goal for us. Briddcut tackle: worth two red cards! And the goal regardless if it was going in or not it still hit his hand. If he sees it he has to blow for a free kick. Utterly shocking performance by the ref against both teams. But if we can't take our chances at this level we will get punished, even against teams as poor as sunderland.
Having seen Brown's again, he got the ball but it was one of them two footed jump tackles that can be really dangerous.
It does get boring continuously talking about the referees. But, they don't help themselves with a catalogue of basic errors. I know it's a human element, and therefore it's never going to be 100% perfect, however, we seem to talk about the missing some really big calls too often, whether it's a sending off or a goal. When the ball is in the box a referee should be in a prime position to be able to get these decisions right. These decision cost clubs points, and could lead to relegation.
So the ball hit his hand and luckily the ref didn;t disallow the goal means "I intentionally punched it in even though it was going in and I cheated"?? Bullshit! He said that it hit his arm - he didn;t say that he handled the ball - but he also could've understood the ref not giving the goal as it hit his arm? Look back at the 2 handballs in the box you lot did against us - they were handball - not ball to hand - the first one where Alex Bruce started slapping his chest at the crowd was stupid - and the second one which stopped a cross and your cheating player went down holding his head?? Yeah?? About right that you miss these things but see it against you - I admit that it hit his arm - but in no way do I think it was intentional and it HAS to be intentional to be handball. Why would he punch it in if it's going in anyway?
If the first half is the best you've played in a while you must have been absolutely terrible! You were a little better than us on the break in the first half but we were woeful. (Although we still had 59% possession I believe!) You lot were a tiny bit better and had one very good chance and one lucky goal (down to the free-kick being awarded not down to the finish which I thought was very good BTW)
If it helps Sunderland are just about the worst team I have seen at the KC this season. Probably on an even footing with Villa - though they had Gil who looked really decent. You didn't have any stand out player.
You seem to have ignored the posts earlier in this thread that explain why it WAS hand ball. I would suggest you look at the photo above, taken a split second before Rodwell handled the ball and then read Graham Poll's article on the new IFAB directive on the definition of what is "deliberate", here http://tinyurl.com/ban2anc
Dean did Ok compared to other refs. We should have won. Sunderland are absolute ****, based on Tues & what I saw last weekend. We are a far better team than Sunderland. They should be ecstatic they grubbed a point. Their supporters are a little simple. Bruce is a better manager than the Phantom ****ter. I'm on the ****ter, but not in the changing room. Happy Days, all's good.
