[Football] MOTD

[GT49er]

So is it deemed in control if a goalie parries a shot? It looked like a long parry and his fingers were not wrapped around at any point that made me feel it was under control.

No, it isn't - and what, pray, is a 'long parry'? Is it like a long kick or a long header perhaps?

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

No, it isn't - and what, pray, is a 'long parry'? Is it like a long kick or a long header perhaps?

I would say a long parry is the passage of the ball coinciding with the passage of the hands, with the emphasis on coinciding. Just happen to be in contact long enough to give the illusion of a sniff of control before ball and hands go their merry way. Whether the deciding force is the ground or whether it is a part of a players body is immaterial.

The rule may or may not justify this but I am certain that were that game to play out again and without VAR, the goal would stand most of the time as nobody except for the team affected detrimentally, would complain. Even with var, as someone said, a similar thing played out with Pigford a few matches ago. So there is obviously room for interpretation.

 

[GT49er]

I would say a long parry is the passage of the ball coinciding with the passage of the hands, with the emphasis on coinciding. Just happen to be in contact long enough to give the illusion of a sniff of control before ball and hands go their merry way. Whether the deciding force is the ground or whether it is a part of a players body is immaterial.

It is extemely not immaterial! Under the rule, if the contact is with the player, it is deemed a foul; if he hits the groud (without being pushed there) he's spilled the ball. Yes, I agree (yes really!) that it's a silly rule, but that is the reason the goal was disallowed. Like it or not (personally, I don't).

The rule may or may not justify this but I am certain that were that game to play out again and without VAR, the goal would stand most of the time as nobody except for the team affected detrimentally, would complain.

Absolutely. I completely agree. No VAR, and that was allowed.
I don't know about the Pickford case - maybe VAR got it technically wrong, or more likely my guess would be that the VAR adjudged that he had dropped the ball - and therefore wasn't in control of it - before colliding with someone.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

It is extemely not immaterial! Under the rule, if the contact is with the player, it is deemed a foul; if he hits the groud (without being pushed there) he's speilled the ball. Yes, I agree (yes really!) that it's a silly rule, but that is the reasn the goal was disallowed. Loke it or not (personally, I don't).

It is immaterial in my view if the goalkeeper is the one crashing into the other party.

 

[GT49er]

It is immaterial in my view if the goalkeeper is the one crashing into the other party.

Not immaterial in the rules, unfortunately.

 

[Hendrax]

seems we're 5th. behind Liverpool, Citeh, Burnley and Villa

 

[Washie]

seems we're 5th. behind Liverpool, Citeh, Burnley and Villa

Makes sense. First two are fighting for the title. Then the next two are about relegation, can Burnley win and help get closer to safety? Or can Watford give themselves, Leeds and Everton a glimmer of hope? Are Norwich going to be relegated today? Then a mid-table match with nothing on the line.

 

[Brok]

seems we're 5th. behind Liverpool, Citeh, Burnley and Villa

That's OK. Nothing worth watching after us.

 

[hart's shirt]

That's OK. Nothing worth watching after us.

We might get a mention on the MOTD Top 10 immediately afterwards at 11:40pm.

Best Premier League derbies are being covered this week.

I haven't listened to the podcast so can't confirm and more than happy to be corrected here.

But a couple of months ago, BBC Sport were asking people to order their top 10 EPL derbies.

Albion v Palace were one of the 10 options to vote on.

 

[hart's shirt]

Here we go...the main event.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Looking forward to this.

 

[dazzer6666]

Jenas loves us. Always very complimentary

 

[Munkfish]

Nice analysis but crap highlights. Just slightly longer than you get on sky sports.

 

[NorfolkGull]

Turn it off now. Palace are losing

 

[hart's shirt]

Lineker: "They were really good, weren't they?"

Jenas: "They were better than good."

"The perfect blend of quality in midfield with pace and power."

"Brighton, they've got a top manager with top players."


Not much time for the pundit discussion and no real analysis, but very complimentary once again.

 

[hart's shirt]

We might get a mention on the MOTD Top 10 immediately afterwards at 11:40pm.

Best Premier League derbies are being covered this week.

I haven't listened to the podcast so can't confirm and more than happy to be corrected here.

But a couple of months ago, BBC Sport were asking people to order their top 10 EPL derbies.

Albion v Palace were one of the 10 options to vote on.

Maupay featured in the opening montage.

Think Albion v Palace might shortly get a mention, albeit probably ending up in 10th out of 10!

Waiting for the 'A23/M23 derby' namecheck or El Gatwicko.

Edit - yes, they don't get it at all. Clearly they've done no research!

 

[GT49er]

More like 20th. out of 10, after hearing Shearer and laughing boy's comments.. Ah well, I wasn't that interested in the concept of the programme anyway. Off switch duly utilised.

 

[ChickenBaltiPie]

Very, very disappointed they hadn’t done their homework on our very legitimate A23 derby. All three scoffed at it, clueless. Place us 10th by all means but at least ‘try’ to understand. Could’ve added some very interesting context. Our rivalry is more valid than most in my opinion based on more than simply our coincidental geographical location.

 

[B-right-on]

One of the best and most complimentary comments on MOTD. For once it was not about how crap the other team was but how good we were.

 

[AmexRuislip]

So what's it going to be tonight?

A: a fantastical Albion performance

B: a poor Manure performance