1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

****ing **** REF

Discussion in 'Sunderland' started by froggy1973, Jan 29, 2012.

  1. Wease555

    Wease555 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,084
    Likes Received:
    8
    Just want to be in the hat for the draw, we have been very poor today. Its been a very scrappy game to be fair with the only real quality on show being the two finishes for the goals. We have been better second half but the final ball has let us down a bit.
     
    #21
  2. Patthemackem

    Patthemackem Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    1
    Oh shut up man it shouldn't have stood so who cares
     
    #22
  3. ...And Out Come the Wolve

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,309
    Likes Received:
    92
    It was handball, but unless the ref or linesman have x-ray vision, they were not in a postion to see.

    Since they no longer do the 'interfering with play' rule, Whickham did nothing wrong since he wasn't active, despite being in an offside position.

    So the goal should have stood, though had the game been played before the rule change it should not have stood.
     
    #23
  4. trouble_n_stripes

    trouble_n_stripes Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,102
    Likes Received:
    7
    I'm of the opinion the linesman, or should I be politically correct, linesperson gave offside assuming Wickham got a touch. I don't know?

    The offence for handball was not given, Wickham was not offside from the original ball into the area, the passage of play leading to the 'disallowed' goal saw Wickham supposedly intefering with play, this is a strange one.

    So when is the ball deemed 'live' from the original cross or well after?

    Not sure if I've explained the situation very well, confusing myself......
     
    #24

Share This Page