+ Visit Notts. County FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Results 1 to 10 of 231

Thread: O/T:- Forest Crying (Again)

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    9,976
    Quote Originally Posted by Lullapie View Post
    You have to be careful not to read into something what isn't being said. Nowhere did the tweet say that. They could have been inferring that Stuart Attwell's judgement could have been clouded by the fact that he is a Luton fan. I'm sure any football fan could understand how that could happen. Really, Attwell should have turned down the position for the game when it was given to him as a conflict of interest.


    "Three extremely poor decisions - three penalties not given - which we simply cannot accept.

    We warned the PGMOL that the VAR is a Luton fan before the game but they didn’t change him. Our patience has been tested multiple times."



    Forest said they 'warned' the PGMOL, who replied by saying that Forest never asked for him to be removed - semantics from the PGMOL there.

    Wot? You’re dealing in semantics yourself. Forest’s initial tweet can be easily inferred as suggesting Attwell deliberately didn’t give them penalties because he supports a rival, which is why they pulled back on it the next day. ‘Having his judgment clouded’ is just a different way of saying the same thing.

    For Attwell to overturn any of those decisions there had to be a ‘clear and obvious’ error. You could possibly make the case there was in one of those situations but certainly not the other two.

    I watched a bit of the Brighton game last night and they had a penalty appeal turned down at 1-0 which was at least as clear as those Forest decisions. I’m yet to see any fuss about it but then they aren’t owned by a temperamental shipping magnate possibly about to lose millions because he’s bought a load of crap players.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by BigFatPie View Post
    Wot? You’re dealing in semantics yourself. Forest’s initial tweet can be easily inferred as suggesting Attwell deliberately didn’t give them penalties because he supports a rival, which is why they pulled back on it the next day. ‘Having his judgment clouded’ is just a different way of saying the same thing.

    For Attwell to overturn any of those decisions there had to be a ‘clear and obvious’ error. You could possibly make the case there was in one of those situations but certainly not the other two.

    I watched a bit of the Brighton game last night and they had a penalty appeal turned down at 1-0 which was at least as clear as those Forest decisions. I’m yet to see any fuss about it but then they aren’t owned by a temperamental shipping magnate possibly about to lose millions because he’s bought a load of crap players.
    But we musn't forget that Brighton were playing the 'untouchable' Manchester City.

Forum Info

Footymad Forums offer you the chance to interact and discuss all things football with fellow fans from around the world, and share your views on footballing issues from the latest, breaking transfer rumours to the state of the game at international level and everything in between.

Whether your team is battling it out for the Premier League title or struggling for League survival, there's a forum for you!

Gooners, Mackems, Tractor Boys - you're all welcome, please just remember to respect the opinions of others.

Click here for a full list of the hundreds of forums available to you

The forums are free to join, although you must play fair and abide by the rules explained here, otherwise your ability to post may be temporarily or permanently revoked.

So what are you waiting for? Register now and join the debate!

(these forums are not actively moderated, so if you wish to report any comment made by another member please report it.)



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •