[Albion] A captain's fury.

[clapham_gull]

so play advantage. not a valid excuse, unless it was a Brighton player, then a free kick to them, which didnt happen.

watching on MotD seems he was told to go (or went himself?) to VAR and overrule his own mind that he had blown. i never like to think of our game as corrupt, but that does make me wonder.

Either the player is lying (there were only West Brom players in the wall) or the referee is.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

A law change is needed, why do we have to have a whistle to take a free kick. A lot of free kicks are because defenders break up an attack, taking one for the team. Any advantage the attacking team has is then taken away from them, allowing defenders to get back.
If you want to take a quick free kick you should be allowed to.

You don't have to wait for a whistle unless the ref indicates you do/

 

[1066familyman]

Not a statement - was ‘guidance’ to sky sports live broadcast

To clarify...

There is no obligation on the ref to wait for the goalkeeper to be ready before a freekick is taken, is there?

So long as the ball is placed correctly and there are no opposition players infringing the 10 yards, once the ref blows the whistle, the free kick may be taken, regardless of whether any opposition players are 'ready' or not.

Is that the case?

 

[Bodian]

To clarify...

There is no obligation on the ref to wait for the goalkeeper to be ready before a freekick is taken, is there?

So long as the ball is placed correctly and there are no opposition players infringing the 10 yards, once the ref blows the whistle, the free kick may be taken, regardless of whether any opposition players are 'ready' or not.

Is that the case?

Yes.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

To clarify...

There is no obligation on the ref to wait for the goalkeeper to be ready before a freekick is taken, is there?

So long as the ball is placed correctly and there are no opposition players infringing the 10 yards, once the ref blows the whistle, the free kick may be taken, regardless of whether any opposition players are 'ready' or not.

Is that the case?

Exactly and this is a big one and that didn't happen the var ref can only make a decision of fact ie a foul inside the area otherwise any view is for the on pitch ref to look at the screen/ There was no matter of fact so the bald prick should have only changed his view after he alone looked at it, as there was cock all to look at it was a goal. It's a farce simple as.

 

[clapham_gull]

To clarify...

There is no obligation on the ref to wait for the goalkeeper to be ready before a freekick is taken, is there?

So long as the ball is placed correctly and there are no opposition players infringing the 10 yards, once the ref blows the whistle, the free kick may be taken, regardless of whether any opposition players are 'ready' or not.

Is that the case?

No obligation at all. Usually from a free kick from that distance a player takes a run up, but Dunks "dink" did away from that.

But as the whistle goes the goalkeeper reacts to the whistle and moves to the centre of the goal. WBA might be annoyed but when Mason made his decision he should have stayed with it.

It's as an appalling decision as I've ever seen.

You expect referees to get the odd foul and offside incorrect, but not something like this. It was pure panic compounded by further panic giving the goal.

Shouldn't be anywhere near the Premier League sorry, not after that.

 

[darkwolf666]

To clarify...

There is no obligation on the ref to wait for the goalkeeper to be ready before a freekick is taken, is there?

So long as the ball is placed correctly and there are no opposition players infringing the 10 yards, once the ref blows the whistle, the free kick may be taken, regardless of whether any opposition players are 'ready' or not.

Is that the case?

No, the opposition can be as close as they like if the attacking team clearly elects to go quick, as was the case here.

Normally the attacking team would wait for the defenders to be 10 yards away, but there is nothing in the laws to say they HAVE to be, if the attacking team elects to take their chances!

 

[1066familyman]

Yes.

Well then his only straw left to clutch at is this 'infringement in the wall'.

He clearly steps away from the wall with his hands by his side as he blew for Dunk to take the free kick. No intention of speaking to anyone.

Furthermore, there's no Brighton players in the wall. If it's a West Brom infringement, then surely advantage comes into play and the goal stands.

 

[Easy 10]

Am I going crazy you LITERALLY said it here:

I give up.

You are the original pigeon on a chessboard that lands, knocks all the pieces over, shits all over the place and then struts off like its won the game. I just have not the energy or the will to battle your epic twattishness. Congrats - you have beaten me down with your abject idiocy.

 

[darkwolf666]

Well then his only straw left to clutch at is this 'infringement in the wall'.

He clearly steps away from the wall with his hands by his side as he blew for Dunk to take the free kick. No intention of speaking to anyone.

Furthermore, there's no Brighton players in the wall. If it's a West Brom infringement, then surely advantage comes into play and the goal stands.

There was no infringement in the wall. It's a cover up, pure and simple. The only thing that could have been given is offside, but as we retook the kick that clearly wasn't the case

The ref ****ed up and is now trying to cover it up, with the help of VAR and his bosses... Disgraceful!

 

[1066familyman]

No, the opposition can be as close as they like if the attacking team clearly elects to go quick, as was the case here.

Normally the attacking team would wait for the defenders to be 10 yards away, but there is nothing in the laws to say they HAVE to be, if the attacking team elects to take their chances!

Yeah, I realise if the ref has already given permission, the attacking team can take it quick without the opposition being the required distance away, if they choose.

 

[1066familyman]

No obligation at all. Usually from a free kick from that distance a player takes a run up, but Dunks "dink" did away from that.

But as the whistle goes the goalkeeper reacts to the whistle and moves to the centre of the goal. WBA might be annoyed but when Mason made his decision he should have stayed with it.

It's as an appalling decision as I've ever seen.

You expect referees to get the odd foul and offside incorrect, but not something like this. It was pure panic compounded by further panic giving the goal.

Shouldn't be anywhere near the Premier League sorry, not after that.

Exactly!

 

[Easy 10]

To clarify...

There is no obligation on the ref to wait for the goalkeeper to be ready before a freekick is taken, is there?

So long as the ball is placed correctly and there are no opposition players infringing the 10 yards, once the ref blows the whistle, the free kick may be taken, regardless of whether any opposition players are 'ready' or not.

Is that the case?

Precisely

Hence Dunks goal at Anfield in the same scenario last season, which correctly stood. There is supposed to be SOME advantage to the team on the receiving end of the foul, and if the ref blows the whistle before the other team is ready, then well, tough shit.

Except for today. They made up a brand new ruling today.

 

[1066familyman]

There was no infringement in the wall. It's a cover up, pure and simple. The only thing that could have been given is offside, but as we retook the kick that clearly wasn't the case

The ref ****ed up and is now trying to cover it up, with the help of VAR and his bosses... Disgraceful!

And exactly this too!

 

[*Gullsworth*]

No, the opposition can be as close as they like if the attacking team clearly elects to go quick, as was the case here.

Normally the attacking team would wait for the defenders to be 10 yards away, but there is nothing in the laws to say they HAVE to be, if the attacking team elects to take their chances!

You are right and I bet if Dunks kick had hit the wall he wouldn't have it retaken saying the wall or keeper was not ready.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Hats off to Dunk for quick thinking...didn’t he do something similar against Liverpool..(last season?)

 

[1066familyman]

Precisely

Hence Dunks goal at Anfield in the same scenario last season, which correctly stood. There is supposed to be SOME advantage to the team on the receiving end of the foul, and if the ref blows the whistle before the other team is ready, then well, tough shit.

Except for today. They made up a brand new ruling today.

I think the only reason I'm still here at gone 11pm setting things out like an idiot school boy lawyer is because I'm still in a bit of disbelief at what I saw. I've genuinely never seen anything like it!

I'm not even still here out of any bitterness because of the result. That was our own fault.

I'm just gobsmacked at what I saw, and now very interested to see how the powers that be will wriggle out of it.

 

[Easy 10]

Bottom line - as a direct result of the rank incompetence of the officials, we were denied a crucial legitimate equaliser. Our abject profligacy with penalties and other chances is a separate in-house issue to resolve.

But after half an hour today, it SHOULD have been 1-1. And a whole different game. Mason and "Hoops" have a shitload to answer for. A f*cking shitload.

 

[*Gullsworth*]

I think the only reason I'm still here at gone 11pm setting things out like an idiot school boy lawyer is because I'm still in a bit of disbelief at what I saw. I've genuinely never seen anything like it!

I'm not even still here out of any bitterness because of the result. That was our own fault.

I'm just gobsmacked at what I saw, and now very interested to see how the powers that be will wriggle out of it.

The win was beyond us because of our ineptitude. A point was lost because of the refs ineptitude.

 

[Easy 10]

I think the only reason I'm still here at gone 11pm setting things out like an idiot school boy lawyer is because I'm still in a bit of disbelief at what I saw. I've genuinely never seen anything like it!

I'm not even still here out of any bitterness because of the result. That was our own fault.

I'm just gobsmacked at what I saw, and now very interested to see how the powers that be will wriggle out of it.

When it comes to an epic f*ck-up like this, there's no wriggling out of it. Same as that Southampton foul that won them the game, when the ref called it a free kick outside the box, but VAR then wrongly said was a penalty. That cost us at least a point, and the PGMOL later apologised for the error. We might get another apology after the astonishing f*ck up they made today. Doesn't mean we'll retrieve any points though.

Its utterly disgusting.