What's new

Brentford vs Chelsea (PL) Saturday 13th September20:00 GMT

Also hearing the goal was offside ?
Click to expand...
The goal was offside, the player who was offside literally swung at the ball in front of Reece James but there was no way we was getting that decision after all the media fury with the disallowed Fulham goal.

We’ve only ourselves to blame though, stupid line up from the off and with the late equaliser 4 men going for the same ball, losing out to 1 Brentford man and leaving Garnarcho own his own to deal with the back post.

 
Sometimes you need luck. The luck of the scousers for instance. 1-0 with a penalty in injury time. Meh. We lost this game last year and we have a pretty terrible record against the hoof football of Brentford. We have only beaten them one time in the last 8 games. Of course this Brentford without their good manager. Brentford are heading down imho and I am not going to miss them. What worries most is our manager and his inability to really take all these amazing young players to the next level.

 
It was, but you won't see the same theatrics from the media like we did in the game against Fulham.
Click to expand...
We shall never speak of this again!

Over here, NBC were still banging on about the Fulham goal and how they were due vs Leeds. They must have mentioned it atleast three times in highlights

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It was, but you won't see the same theatrics from the media like we did in the game against Fulham.
Click to expand...
Of course not.

This one is worse than fulham though. That call was wrong based on the VAR persons opinion of it being wrong.

Brentford goal was factual.it was offside, no ifs, no buts, no debate. The VAR ignored it, can only be because they wanted the goal to stand. They should be sacked.

 
The VAR for yesterday's game Was someone named James Bell.

They have since admit to Ottowara being offside but deemed the player to not be interfering enough on the play to overrule the onfield call. The the on field call was not a clear and obvious error.

Now if that exact terminology was not used by Howard Webb about the fulham disallowed goal.

Is what I said it was, a deliberate choice to allow a clear offside goal to stick one on us.

 
The VAR for yesterday's game Was someone named James Bell.

They have since admit to Ottowara being offside but deemed the player to not be interfering enough on the play to overrule the onfield call. The the on field call was not a clear and obvious error.

Now if that exact terminology was not used by Howard Webb about the fulham disallowed goal.

Is what I said it was, a deliberate choice to allow a clear offside goal to stick one on us.
Click to expand...
Well they're talking sh*te, because when it comes to offsides, there is no subjectivity involved. It either is or isn't. If the player in an offside position makes an action to play the ball, and it impacts an opponent (James in this example) then it's offside.

The refs in this country are just sh*t. They make it up as they go along, and when they're not doing that, they are influenced by the media. Nothings going to change, because the PGMOL are untouchable.

 
Well they're talking sh*te, because when it comes to offsides, there is no subjectivity involved. It either is or isn't. If the player in an offside position makes an action to play the ball, and it impacts an opponent (James in this example) then it's offside.

The refs in this country are just sh*t. They make it up as they go along, and when they're not doing that, they are influenced by the media. Nothings going to change, because the PGMOL are untouchable.
Click to expand...
it’s very hard to win a league when one team get stripped 2 points on a decision and the team you’re competing with get gifted 2 that’s a 4 point swing right there, now count that up over a season

 
Of course not.

This one is worse than fulham though. That call was wrong based on the VAR persons opinion of it being wrong.

Brentford goal was factual.it was offside, no ifs, no buts, no debate. The VAR ignored it, can only be because they wanted the goal to stand. They should be sacked.
Click to expand...
In a nutshell.

 
Terrible decisions by VAR. There were also (IMO) clear obstruction fouls by Brentford players on Tosin and Cucurella, which allowed the ball to carry on uncontested to Carvalho. Ouatarra was clearly offside. Much like Eze's goal, yes it was a decision based on a minor technicality, but it is black-and-white all the same.

...but

We should not be relying on technicalities to win at Brentford. Our focus needs to be on the disaster that was the first goal, almost a carbon-copy of the disallowed goal vs Fulham, and reminiscent of so many goals last season (eg Mitoma), and the complete lack of chance creation for 65-odd minutes. Two speculative but clinical finishes won us the points against a team we should have created much more.

Winning at Brentford is what separates title challengers and form teams from the dross.

 
How can a player, who causes 2 opposition players to alter their approach, not be deemed to be interfering.

Don’t get me wrong Brentford deserved something out the game but it just seems once again a result had come about by VAR being blatantly wrong.

 
REF WATCH THIS MORNINGShould Brentford's equaliser have stood?INCIDENT: Brentford snatched a late draw at home to Chelsea. But should the equaliser have stood? There was a shout of offside, cleared by the VAR, on Dango Ouattara.

Does Outarra have an impact on Reece James' ability to clear the ball?  

DERMOT SAYS: "I think it's a good goal. Being in an offside position isn't an offence in itself.

"Has he touched the ball? No. Has he interfered with an opponent? I think not.

"We've seen this happen before in the Premier League, where the VAR has to decide to send him or not and, at this point, he decides not to send him because he feels Ouattara hasn't impacted on the defender."

JAY BOTHROYD: "I disagree with that one. I think Ouattara has definitely interfered there.

"He's actually reached for the ball, the ball has bounced in between him, the other attacking player and Reece James and then gone all the way through. He reaches for the ball, which impacts James.

"You can't see any real touch from him but, ultimately, the fact he's gone for it means he's affected the play.

"If the flick-on initially went to the goalscorer there, he wouldn't interfere in play, but the fact it has dropped right in between the players is interference. That would bother me as a player."

 
I'm not arsed we didn't do enough regardless.

Maresca can't get away with bad management every game.
Click to expand...
BUT HE IS

I predicted he would be sacked by christmas, difficult run of games coming up

United, Forest, Spurs, Burnley, Leeds, Bournemouth, Newcastle - all away in PL ,add Munich, Quarabag, Atalanta - CL all away plus Lincoln

Brighton, Liverpool, Sunderland, Wolves, Arsenal, Everton - home in PL, add Benfica, A**x, Barcelona - CL

Drop a lot of points in those games and we could be down the table

 
Any better now?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately no. The site won't even allow me enough time to stay logged in so I can register for the ad free version with a donation.

 
Unfortunately no. The site won't even allow me enough time to stay logged in so I can register for the ad free version with a donation.
Click to expand...
You can post though?

I'm trying to work out the issue, but have purged all the cache again so see if that does anything different!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top