Tottenham Vs Newcastle - Sunday 27th Sept, 2pm KO.

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Have you furloughed your servants yet?
Given a couple of parlour maids a month unpaid holiday. Need the butler and my manservant as I don't dress myself. Butler to choose the wine of course. The cook's assistant is on 1/2 pay too. This virus is SO inconvenient. I wonder if it could be modified to attack Woolwich, Chelscum etc etc supporters only. And the working classes, obviously. Must go. Polo match to attend.
 
Just watched it again, though I shouldn't.

What captures me is not the lack of quality of the decisions, even after 4 mins of constant reviewing. What irks me is the arbitrary nature of the whole thing.

So, it is one situation, but borne out of 4 individual passages of the same 2 plays:

- PEH's "freekick": Not reviewed
- The offside: Reviewed, verdict against us
- Dier pushed in the back, two hands: Not reviewed
- The handball: Reviewed, verdict against us

The odd part is, that while the offside review was dodgy and the handball a straight up meme, the situation as a whole begs the question: Who made the decision to review only 2 of 4 passages? On what grounds? Under what oversight?

4 passages of play, and a single review of either 4 in our favour would have cut the causalty chain leading to the penalty. Two reviews being made against us, one inconsistent the other scandalous. Alright.
But the two passages not reviewed together with the complete lack of transparency doesn't spell out "incompetence". It spells out "corruption".

Last night I lauded the likes of Bruce, Carragher and Co. slamming the handball decision. But really, the decision is just one scandalous individual decision. Nobody even mentions, why so many passages of play within 10 secs of time were either overruled or ignored - and that it was in fact not the first penalty review late last night. Incompetence is nothing if not random. This was far from random.

Is this nonsense? OK. Then ask yourselves this - If Hugo had been half and inch quicker and pawed away the pen shot: Do you really think they would not have had it retaken?

I don’t think that free kicks are deemed “match-changing decisions”, same as throw ins. So they were never going to review the non-foul by PEH.
 
Just watched it again, though I shouldn't.

What captures me is not the lack of quality of the decisions, even after 4 mins of constant reviewing. What irks me is the arbitrary nature of the whole thing.

So, it is one situation, but borne out of 4 individual passages of the same 2 plays:

- PEH's "freekick": Not reviewed
- The offside: Reviewed, verdict against us
- Dier pushed in the back, two hands: Not reviewed
- The handball: Reviewed, verdict against us

The odd part is, that while the offside review was dodgy and the handball a straight up meme, the situation as a whole begs the question: Who made the decision to review only 2 of 4 passages? On what grounds? Under what oversight?

4 passages of play, and a single review of either 4 in our favour would have cut the causalty chain leading to the penalty. Two reviews being made against us, one inconsistent the other scandalous. Alright.
But the two passages not reviewed together with the complete lack of transparency doesn't spell out "incompetence". It spells out "corruption".

Last night I lauded the likes of Bruce, Carragher and Co. slamming the handball decision. But really, the decision is just one scandalous individual decision. Nobody even mentions, why so many passages of play within 10 secs of time were either overruled or ignored - and that it was in fact not the first penalty review late last night. Incompetence is nothing if not random. This was far from random.

Is this nonsense? OK. Then ask yourselves this - If Hugo had been half and inch quicker and pawed away the pen shot: Do you really think they would not have had it retaken?
Genuine question.

Does the free kick decision get reviewed if it leads to a penalty or a goal?

I don't think it does. But I don't know.
 
Seems I have some apologising to do... to get my yellow card rescinded!!!

Now I know how Gary Lineker feels... had HE got a yellow ever in his career!

Think I need to take a break from football, for now....


Sorry for any offence caused. You know I didn't mean it....

I'm just perplexed at where we ALL are right now.... football... life... all of it.

Sad times indeed.
I shall not contest my Yellow... for FEAR of it being upgraded to a red...
A 3 match ban is more than I could contemplate right now!
Just had a look at when my yellow card is 'rescinded': October 18th 2020...

Ironically, I've only just realised I joined this forum on October 19th (2011)

....seems pretty apt to take a well earned break from here until then...
I realise my Yellow was totally self-inflicted, and all of my own making.... but I probably need the break.

So maybe it's best I only return on my "9th Anniversaey" with a clean slate on the 19th October.... it'll be interesting if I can stay away for the next 3 weeks or so.... or whether I really am 'addicted' and sneak back in.... only time will tell!

See y'all then.
 
I just don’t understand why the rule has to be applied in this way. Surely the referee can consider the intent of the player? Penalties and free kicks are supposed to punish foul play.

These are the rules:

Deliberate handball remains an offence
• The following ‘handball’ situations, even if accidental, will be a free kick:
• the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm
• a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which has made their body unnaturally bigger
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm when it is above their shoulder (unless the player has deliberately played the ball which then touches their hand/arm)
The following will not usually be a free kick, unless they are one of the above situations:
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or the head/body/foot of another player who is close/near.


The diving headbutt "foul"
We were told Sonny's armpit was offside so the offside from the free kick
The push on Dier's back in the box

One could be a mistake. But VAR and the ref all conspired to gift that pen to Newcastle. As to why I am unsure if it is pressure from EPL stakeholders trying to get the established markets back on top, or plain old bribery.

I can't imagine it was just because the refs don't like Spurs. Too much to risk for that.
 
These are the rules:

Deliberate handball remains an offence
• The following ‘handball’ situations, even if accidental, will be a free kick:
• the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm
• a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which has made their body unnaturally bigger
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm when it is above their shoulder (unless the player has deliberately played the ball which then touches their hand/arm)
The following will not usually be a free kick, unless they are one of the above situations:
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or the head/body/foot of another player who is close/near.


The diving headbutt "foul"
We were told Sonny's armpit was offside so the offside from the free kick
The push on Dier's back in the box

One could be a mistake. But VAR and the ref all conspired to gift that pen to Newcastle. As to why I am unsure if it is pressure from EPL stakeholders trying to get the established markets back on top, or plain old bribery.

I can't imagine it was just because the refs don't like Spurs. Too much to risk for that.

But it says right there that it’s a handball offence if the ball touches a players arm when it’s above their shoulder, even if accidental. So the laws were applied correctly, they are just fucking stupid.
 
But it says right there that it’s a handball offence if the ball touches a players arm when it’s above their shoulder even of accidental. So the laws were applied correctly, they are just fucking stupid.

But it also says right there that it won't if it comes off another player that is close. Same as the Doc one.

Maybe the ref took a look at Carroll's greasy hair and figured nobody would willingly get close to that. :dier:
 
But it also says right there that it won't if it comes off another player that is close. Same as the Doc one.

Maybe the ref took a look at Carroll's greasy hair and figured nobody would willingly get close to that. :dier:

The following will not usually be a free kick, unless they are one of the above situations:
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or the head/body/foot of another player who is close/near.

So Dier’s arm being raised above his shoulder means it doesn’t matter how close the other player is, according to this shit rule. Arm up, penalty. No discussion.
 
The following will not usually be a free kick, unless they are one of the above situations:
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or the head/body/foot of another player who is close/near.

So Dier’s arm being raised above his shoulder means it doesn’t matter how close the other player is, according to this shit rule. Arm up, penalty. No discussion.

You're right. I misread it. :mourthumb:

So, back to the non foul and offside then...
 
Is it any surprise Mike Dean was on the scene? It seems to me, the powers that be apply pressure early in the season for teams like us to drop valuable points so as not to be a threat for their favoured and important teams. (The Son goal against Leicester last season) The brutal scheduling annually is another way of manipulating things to suit.
 
Is it any surprise Mike Dean was on the scene? It seems to me, the powers that be apply pressure early in the season for teams like us to drop valuable points so as not to be a threat for their favoured and important teams. (The Son goal against Leicester last season) The brutal scheduling annually is another way of manipulating things to suit.
Who was the ref in the VAR booth?
 
Referee: Peter Bankes. Assistants: Peter Kirkup, James Mainwaring. Fourth official: Mike Dean. VAR: Lee Mason. Assistant VAR: Andy Halliday.

A little googling later lead me to this.

Which states that last season Newcastle felt hard done by with Lee Mason running their games and were demanding he retire.
Shocking shit
 
With new handball rules, players should just aim for defenders arm instead of taking a shot at goal. probably alot easier to score goal this way.
Train all our players to aim for the arm in the box; Kane will probably score like 20 goals in one game.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom