Wright penalty decision (3 Viewers)

[stevefloyd]

If you're referring to 'these referee's' as being human, you're doing a great disservice to us genuine humans.
You ill informed other species, you.

Hope you're ok on your perfect planet...tosser

 

---

[Gint11]

I say it every game, needs to park the physical battle sometimes, collect the ball on half turn and just run at them. Did it once first half and scared them shitless

Our ball retention and passing was abysmal though otherwise I’d agree. I want to see my two wingers CONSTANTLY forward attack the RB and LB rather than check back but I get by checking back you are keeping the ball and edging up in yardage.

Saka does it a lot and I’m not if it’s him or an instruction. He checks back a lot. Yet when he takes the man on he’s brilliant at it.

 

[CCFCSteve]

Our ball retention and passing was abysmal though otherwise I’d agree. I want to see my two wingers CONSTANTLY forward attack the RB and LB rather than check back but I get by checking back you are keeping the ball and edging up in yardage.

Saka does it a lot and I’m not if it’s him or an instruction. He checks back a lot. Yet when he takes the man on he’s brilliant at it.

Agree about our ball retention the other night, it was awful and I’m not just talking about Ipswich, more that by always going to hold off defender like a CF he gives himself less options ie unless he’s got an overlap then it’s a lay off. It also allows defender to just stay tight which furlong did very well. The one time I can remember EMC trying to take it on the half turn/get in behind second half furlong ended up on his arse and ref gave a soft free kick.

EMC Is a nightmare when running at defenders as he can go both ways and impossible to muscle off the ball, I’d just like to see more of that and less of ball shielding etc (which he is excellent at, probably better than our CFs, but gives less options/slows things down)

 

[saveitforthewombles]

Our ball retention and passing was abysmal though otherwise I’d agree. I want to see my two wingers CONSTANTLY forward attack the RB and LB rather than check back but I get by checking back you are keeping the ball and edging up in yardage.

Saka does it a lot and I’m not if it’s him or an instruction. He checks back a lot. Yet when he takes the man on he’s brilliant at it.

It's actually funny how similar we play to Arsenal....4-3-3, Grimes in the zubimendi role. Happy to leave centre halves 1:1. 2 wingers, importance of set plays.....

 

[Robinshio]

We can’t play with 2 wingers and a below par rudoni. We are too disjointed.

 

[skybluecam]

I'm not sure I'd describe it as stonewall, it's a very awkward one because Wright never has possession of the ball.

 

[Calista]

It is and if that is obstruction you have watched very little football. Haji is ahead of the player and running towards the ball.

As per the sequence in post #200, Haji stops and turns across the (running) defender's path. Is this a picture of Haji running ahead? The second contact would of course be a no-brainer pen if the ref hadn't seen the first from just a few yards away.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

It was a pen and would have been given to Ipswich at Portman Road

 

[Otis]

It was a pen and would have been given to Ipswich at Portman Road

The ref was the wrong side of it, so can see why it wasn't given. From the main stand side, you can clearly see Furlong taking Wright's legs away from under him.

 

[David O'Day]

As per the sequence in post #200, Haji stops and turns across the (running) defender's path. Is this a picture of Haji running ahead? The second contact would of course be a no-brainer pen if the ref hadn't seen the first from just a few yards away.
View attachment 47965

why do you keep using that still image when the video shows that isn't what happened

 

[David O'Day]

I'm not sure I'd describe it as stonewall, it's a very awkward one because Wright never has possession of the ball.

why does possession of the ball matter? it's still a foul

 

[Calista]

why do you keep using that still image when the video shows that isn't what happened

I agree with your previous statement that Haji moved across the defender. The stills (individually and as a sequence) simply prove that when he did that he was not running ahead as others have claimed, but stopping and turning around with the ball gone way past him.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The ref was the wrong side of it, so can see why it wasn't given. From the main stand side, you can clearly see Furlong taking Wright's legs away from under him.

I can’t for the life of me make any kind of rational argument for not giving it

 

[Calista]

I can’t for the life of me make any kind of rational argument for not giving it.

Maybe give the ref a call then. The deluded fool probably had an illusion of a running player knocked backwards by someone stepping and turning into his path, resulting in a tangle of legs.

Honestly, it's not important is it? Happy New Year and PUSB

 

[shmmeee]

Maybe give the ref a call then. The deluded fool probably had an illusion of a running player knocked backwards by someone stepping and turning into his path, resulting in a tangle of legs.

Honestly, it's not important is it? Happy New Year and PUSB

You’re allowed to step between a player and the ball. You are not allowed to drag down a player that’s between you and the ball.

Hope this helps.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Maybe give the ref a call then. The deluded fool probably had an illusion of a running player knocked backwards by someone stepping and turning into his path, resulting in a tangle of legs.

Honestly, it's not important is it? Happy New Year and PUSB

Course it’s not important
Hnyty too

 

[Calista]

You’re allowed to step between a player and the ball.

You can't impede a running player if the ball's not within playing distance FFS! This is the crux of it.

I too hope this helps.

 

[robbiethemole]

Why are you so anti anything City?
Honestly, I don’t know why you supposedly support the Club? Every fucking post is negative, are you just trying to be edgy cos it’s crap if you are. Enjoy this moment it’s been too long coming

 

[wingy]

You can't impede a running player if the ball's not within playing distance FFS! This is the crux of it.

I too hope this helps.

Take a look at the S/O at Stoke vsheff Utd z, middle of the park on Bamford.

 

[shmmeee]

You can't impede a running player if the ball's not within playing distance FFS! This is the crux of it.

I too hope this helps.

In what way was the ball not in playing distance?

 

[Calista]

Why are you so anti anything City?
Honestly, I don’t know why you supposedly support the Club? Every fucking post is negative, are you just trying to be edgy cos it’s crap if you are. Enjoy this moment it’s been too long coming

Is that directed at me?

 

[shmmeee]

Is that directed at me?

Haha I thought it was for me!

Be more specific!

 

[Skybluekyle]

As per the sequence in post #200, Haji stops and turns across the (running) defender's path. Is this a picture of Haji running ahead? The second contact would of course be a no-brainer pen if the ref hadn't seen the first from just a few yards away.
View attachment 47965

I have watched this back a few times, I don't see anything from Wright to be "extraordinary", by that I mean above and beyond what you see from normal jockeying for position and contesting a loose ball between an attacker and a defender.

If anything, it looks like the defender initiated the majority of the contact and Wright is absolutely in his right to stand his ground and contest the ball. What the defender is not in his right to do is take Wright's legs out, intentionally or not.

I concede I am as biased as everyone here, but it's an absolute stonewall penalty, the contact between the defender and Wright looks "normal", the defender's tackle is "abnormal". If anything, I would be less annoyed if the referee at least gave a decision either way instead of bottling it like a spineless twat like they always do.

 

[Skyblue Bangkok]

I have watched this back a few times, I don't see anything from Wright to be "extraordinary", by that I mean above and beyond what you see from normal jockeying for position and contesting a loose ball between an attacker and a defender.

If anything, it looks like the defender initiated the majority of the contact and Wright is absolutely in his right to stand his ground and contest the ball. What the defender is not in his right to do is take Wright's legs out, intentionally or not.

I concede I am as biased as everyone here, but it's an absolute stonewall penalty, the contact between the defender and Wright looks "normal", the defender's tackle is "abnormal". If anything, I would be less annoyed if the referee at least gave a decision either way instead of bottling it like a spineless twat like they always do.

Let it go the game is finished doesn't matter if it was a pen or not but time has moved on.

 

[Skybluekyle]

Let it go the game is finished doesn't matter if it was a pen or not but time has moved on.

I was "over the result" of the game before I even left the CBS, losses happen and Ipswich are a very good side. I am commenting on an aspect of a recent game, I can do this on games I have "let go" and this is very first comment I've made on this site since the game, I might add.

Strange comment.

 

[Calista]

In what way was the ball not in playing distance?

It's gone way past when their player's head is knocked back by the collision

Honestly, only the ref's opinion counts doesn't it, and I wish I'd never tried to show what his thinking must have been. Apparently the TV pundits agreed with the ref too, so I'll take that as a crumb of comfort if it turns out to be me who's "anti anything City" LOL.