Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Forrestieri's red card v the disallowed "goal"

Red/Yellow, Goal/Not

  • Red Card, Goal

    Votes: 43 28.7%
  • Yellow Card, Goal

    Votes: 44 29.3%
  • Red Card, No goal

    Votes: 22 14.7%
  • Yellow Card, No goal

    Votes: 41 27.3%

  • Total voters
    150








Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015
Actually, look at the goal line at the bottom of the picturte. Its the exact width of the post.

Therefore that means the goal line (which is hidden) is in line with the goal frame.

Meaning the ball didnt cross the line.,

That shot is taken from an angle with a post in the way but you sre certain that proves your point about the ball not being over the line whilst being absolutely certain that the shot taken from another angle that appears to show the ball to be over the line, with grass between it and the goal line, is not conclusive. If I only saw the photo you posted and no other I would struggle to believe the other photo could show the ball to be over the line, but it does.

Are you also certain that the photo you posted shows the ball as far into the goal as it actually went?
 
Last edited:


Joe Gatting's Dad

New member
Feb 10, 2007
1,880
Way out west
The camera angle suggested no goal, but viewed from above, the whole of the ball did not cross the line.

Red card, in view of the way the tackle was made on a goalkeeper who has little opportunity to defend himself from the angle from which Mr F came.
 


Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015
Can someone post a link to the overhead "no goal" photo that I see mentioned on the other thread and in the post above? I have seen two angles so far, is there a third?
 




mejonaNO12 aka riskit

Well-known member
Dec 4, 2003
21,923
England
That shot is taken from an angle with a post in the way ?

But thats my point. The goalline is the exact width of the post, therefore the post isn't "in the way". It's actually a replica of the goal line.

The angle showing grass between the ball and the line proves nothing at all. It's amazing just how much the ball can look over the line at the bottom without being anywhere near completely over.
 


Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015
But thats my point. The goalline is the exact width of the post, therefore the post isn't "in the way". It's actually a replica of the goal line.

.

No, but it is taken from an angle and angles as you suggest can be deceptive. Anyway have you got the overhead photo, that should surely be conclusive IF it's taken at the moment the ball stopped travelling into the goal and was booted out.
 


mejonaNO12 aka riskit

Well-known member
Dec 4, 2003
21,923
England
ball.png


As I have far to much time on my hands I thought I'd draw a basic line to show how much of the ball can still be edging out past the balls contact point with the ground. Fascinating I know.

I apologise if it's terrible...I did it on paint :lolol:
 




Keith1969

New member
May 18, 2013
10
Only saw the game on TV as I live in the North East but it looks on 1 angle to be a goal but not on the other so inconclusive.As for the card I saw it as a red card I would have sent him off if it had been 1 of my games,Bruno should also have walked in the second half,but no-one has said about McGugan he should also of walked as he should have been booked for the challenge of Buckley after around 12 minutes and then he booked later in the match,just a thought.
 










Questions

Habitual User
Oct 18, 2006
25,511
Worthing
He should have got a second yellow for his dive in the box late on when Bruno pulled out of a challenge. Mind you how the f.... Bruno didn't get the red I,ll never know.
 


DJ Leon

New member
Aug 30, 2003
3,446
Hassocks
I am staggered at how little people know about football. The correct answer is yellow card, no goal and if you think otherwise you're NUTS.
 






Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here