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

[Albion] Manchester City vs Brighton & Hove Albion *** Official Match Thread ***



1066familyman

Radio User
Jan 15, 2008
15,235
I'm afraid it was.
That's outrageous! Silva purposely dangled his leg out. Never a penalty in a million years.

How long did it take to bring it back for the ref to have a look? Must have been a good 2 minutes?
 




willalbion

Well-known member
May 8, 2006
1,585
London
Agree it was not exactly a crazy call. Some clumsy defending. Sanchez tackle on Haaland could also have been a penalty. Two 50/50s, one decision went well for Brighton and the other didn't. It is what it is.

If that was in the other penalty area, with Tross or someone not getting a penalty, people here would have been furious about the decision.
Naturally - it’s a partisan sport. My city supporting mate is insisting all 3 were stonewall pens.
 


jcdenton08

Offended Liver Sausage
NSC Patron
Oct 17, 2008
14,575
I thought it was a very poor penalty decision, and I’m not one for judging referees/VAR too harshly. I think we’ve been given a raw deal there.

No problem with the first goal, Haaland is just stronger and quicker than Webster, who is having a bit of a nightmare out there.

Welbeck very poor yet again, how is he the first name on the team sheet?

Let’s keep it to a 3-goal loss with no injuries or suspensions and get Undav on at half time for a proper look. Be nice to see Enciso or Sarmiento too.
 








Tom Hark Preston Park

Will Post For Cash
Jul 6, 2003
72,365
Man City are one of the best teams in the world. EPL championes-in-waiting. As always - apart from the BDB match winnah at the Amex - we'll do well to hold them to the traditional 4-0 reversal. Them's the rules
 




trueblue

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
10,955
Hove
The joke with the second goal was the ref blowing to go and look at the screen, wait until it goes out of play FFS.
But as the whole screen thing is a charade and they give the VAR's decision 99.9% of the time, why wait? If we score in the meantime and then they disallow it to give City a penalty, it would be even worse.
 








PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 15, 2004
19,641
Hurst Green




Paulie Gualtieri

Bada Bing
NSC Patron
May 8, 2018
10,644
Apart from the mistake I thought we have played relatively well first half, RDZ ball seems to be coming through, more fluid and faster and we have broken the press a number of times.

The question is where do we go from here.

Maybe time to inject some flair get in their box more down the sides and look for contact. If we get a couple of weak penalties f*** em.
 




Dibdab

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2021
1,078
I really don’t think it was a foul on Webster and Sanchez has let us down big time for the first but that pen was pathetic. Silva has left his leg out to deliberately contact Dunk. No way should VAR have called that an obvious error.

Other than that we’ve done ok but in the few opportunities in the final third of the pitch our decision making and quality has been bad. Gross and Trossard very poor yet again.
 






maltaseagull

Well-known member
Feb 25, 2009
13,365
Zabbar- Malta
Apart from the mistake I thought we have played relatively well first half, RDZ ball seems to be coming through, more fluid and faster and we have broken the press a number of times.

The question is where do we go from here.

Maybe time to inject some flair get in their box more down the sides and look for contact. If we get a couple of weak penalties f*** em.
US?
Get a penalty at the Etihad?

No way on Earth.
 


1066familyman

Radio User
Jan 15, 2008
15,235
What a heap of shit that second goal was. Looked a nailed on penalty in real time, var then spends an eternity while play still goes on to review it, has the benefit of seeing Silva stick his leg out and decides to send the ref to the monitor. WTF took it so long?! What would have happened if we had scored in the time it took var to decide it was a penalty?

I'm not convinced it was a penalty but I can live with it being one but why did it take so long to decide? It's bollocks.

Apart from that we've been ok although we're at risk of getting turned over. Do we try and get back in the game and get done on the counter or do we try and minimise the damage and invite the best team in Europe to attack us at will? What a choice!
It's a fecking joke decision! And even more of a joke for the amount of time it must have taken to bring it back. Dodgy stream isn't helping me here.

Keep playing the way we're playing. We're doing ok. I don't care if we lose by 2 or 4 or 5. I'm pleased we play without fear that really isn't tipping over into naivety.
 






highflyer

Well-known member
Jan 21, 2016
2,554
Regardless of whether these decisions were right or wrong, if the half ends with three VAR decisions that JC & WA can argue were all wrong, then VAR is not making decisions any less subjective than they were without technology. As this was the reason it was introduced, it is doing nothing. Get rid of the whole charade and just admit that referees will do their best, but are fallible.
Why do they keep it? And indeed, have introduced it in Scotland. When the vast majority of fans, pundits players would say its not working, get rid. Who benefits from keeping it? Is it a pride thing? Is there money involved? There seems to be an assumption that it's here to stay. But why?
It's obviously making the game worse.
 


raymondo

Well-known member
Apr 26, 2017
7,391
Wiltshire
Apart from the mistake I thought we have played relatively well first half, RDZ ball seems to be coming through, more fluid and faster and we have broken the press a number of times.

The question is where do we go from here.

Maybe time to inject some flair get in their box more down the sides and look for contact. If we get a couple of weak penalties f*** em.
Good plan, but sadly I don't think we'll get any weak pens today... we're wearing the wrong colour shirts
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here