1-1.. Overall a fair result I think.
1-1.. Overall a fair result I think.
I think they where fortunate. They got lucky with the off side goal. Lucky with the one off the line. Lucky to have got 5 mins of injury time. And scored a wonder strike with their first real shot on target all night. Raya didn't have a shot to save all night of any note. It was a decent game, we played well. And we have a much better manager.
I saw it as a fair result on balance.
Walking out last night the Villa lot where all fighting amongst themselves. Half of them where celebrating getting a point. The other other half where fuming saying we looked a better side. But they have spent a fortune and if they don't go up, they'll go into admin. And they want Bruce gone. They where actually coming to blows.
All that money, I thought they got very lucky.
I went to some of the Villa fan-sites. Wow! They have turned on Bruce, almost to a man. Many of them are also panning Grealish, who was Villa's best player, according to most of the match-reports.
Champs - you sound like Bruce...but with the opposite bias. He didn't mention the poor off-side decision but laboured the point about the penalty-claim. You are doing the opposite. I've looked at the highlights several times, and - let's be honest - if that had been at the other end, we would have been up in arms that the penalty wasn't given. Some Rovers fans are suggesting the player was already unbalanced, but - regardless of that - it was a clear trip.
Those decisions were arguably borderline, in any other given match they would go one way or the another. That’s the nature of it as you say Aucks. Bias has always been a trait in these situations as long as I can remember.
The penalty claim at the moment it occurred I thought it was A likely pen, and on review still see it as a good case for a shout . On the free kick one my thought was no, but on review I then saw it as ‘clumsy’ by Reed so a free kick was on balance warranted. Despite Grealish being an annoyingly big girls show pony.
Dacks off side was the epitome of fine margins even in super slow mo it’s v v hard to criticise as the player marginally (this is slow mo let’s not forget ) playing him on is in line and directly behind him, (as are several other players) in the line of sight of linesman who can only give what he sees.
Quite frankly go get ****ed pal.
I was sat 10 yards from it not on the other side of the world.
The ref didn't give it, neither did the linesman. He was already slipping over as he went across Smallwood. Where did you want him to go? Disappear into thin air? Bruce didn't mention our goal disallowed? I mentioned their pen. I just happen to think he cut across. Yes he forced contact. But it's a contact sport. The Villa lad didn't even appeal. Our header goal was disallowed because Dack blocked Hutton from where the lino was standing. He was onside. No doubt. But the linesman was insighted.
In your opinion it was clear Auks.
But It was not clear to the Ref, or the linesman. The lad himself didn't really appeal.
If you have ever played football at a certain standard (not 5 a side with work mates on a tues night after work) the pace in which tackles are made are often lost once you have sat and watched 8 times in slow-mo on TV thousands of miles away. The tackle takes place in real time. The lad had slightly lost control, knew the tackle was coming and fell into him, but crucially, he was already slipping over. Before any contact. Then he made sure contact was made.
Contact FYI in case you have forgotten is allowed. Where did you want Smallwood go? Float up to space and allow the lad to score? I'm sure that's what Bruce wanted aswell.
The ref was about 5/6 yards from it, and had a perfect view. I was sat about 10/12 yards away. And saw the same angle. Live ...in play,. as it happened.
Not 15 times via slow-mo. The ref doesn't get that luxury.