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.