0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
It didn’t look a penalty to me.
Nick seems to be talking about the one we could have had when Wilks ended up being booked for simulation
Just seen the one given against us and the ref was conned I think.
Quote from: CottyRover on October 13, 2018, 05:29:12 pmNick seems to be talking about the one we could have had when Wilks ended up being booked for simulationwilks didn’t get booked though do not sure why he gave them a free kick for it,and liked a pen to me.the one that was given for them I actually thought he was giving a free kick to us,but thought the red and linesman on our side was shit all game
In real time their penalty looked like Marquis played the ball and their player came in late. As I saw it I would have given a free kick to the Rovers for a late challenge. It was very similar to the one awarded last season in the Cheka trade when Cannon came from behind and went over.
Quote from: donnievic on October 13, 2018, 07:13:10 pmQuote from: CottyRover on October 13, 2018, 05:29:12 pmNick seems to be talking about the one we could have had when Wilks ended up being booked for simulationwilks didn’t get booked though do not sure why he gave them a free kick for it,and liked a pen to me.the one that was given for them I actually thought he was giving a free kick to us,but thought the red and linesman on our side was shit all game Don’t think it was given for a dive - the ref looked like he gestured for a pull after he blew the whistle.
Quote from: NickDRFC on October 13, 2018, 07:20:09 pmQuote from: donnievic on October 13, 2018, 07:13:10 pmQuote from: CottyRover on October 13, 2018, 05:29:12 pmNick seems to be talking about the one we could have had when Wilks ended up being booked for simulationwilks didn’t get booked though do not sure why he gave them a free kick for it,and liked a pen to me.the one that was given for them I actually thought he was giving a free kick to us,but thought the red and linesman on our side was shit all game Don’t think it was given for a dive - the ref looked like he gestured for a pull after he blew the whistle.Correct or else he'd have booked Wilks for simulation, which he didn't.I did not think the Marquis foul was a penalty at the time. He didn't protest though I don't think.
I'm not disputing their penalty for one second, but, when you look where the ball comes in from and the fact JM was in front of their player, there's possibly sufficient reason to cast doubt on any decision, but the referee immediately blew for it. It's as though he couldn't wait to give them something. Then, fast forward to the Wilks incident and he somehow sees something entirely different. Totally inconsistent and this is why supporters get so hacked off with officials.
Didn't say giving them a foul made him inconsistent!
Nthle made the most of going over Marquis' foot even if Marquis did foul him.
No, and that's not my point either. I'm saying that you can't label a referee 'inconsistent' because he gave a penalty at one end, but didn't at the other, when the nature of the respective incident was very different.