Had it gone against us I would have been frustrated, just like I was in the first half when Tierney did the same in reverse; and just like I was when Danilo dived and conned a free kick out of Bradley; and just like I was when Konate nearly got his head lopped off by yard dog Yates, who should have been on a yellow from near to the start of the game … etc.
There were lots of frustrating decisions that we didn’t get against Forest.
They are quite right in that Tierney made an error in giving the ball back to Kelleher. The scale of the error was small, and there were lots of other steps that have all been outlined, between the restart post Konate head injury, and Darwin Nunez scoring our winner.
What Forest succeeded in doing, for me at least, is hoping that they go down. I am just about old enough to remember the great team that Clough assembled, and I had a soft spot for them as they remind me of a better day, before football was overrun by money, legitimate money or otherwise.
But the goodwill has evaporated and I hope they go down.
6 Likes
Is it a serious question though?
I will humour you.
I for one would be livid.
2 Likes
It’s. Game keeper turned poacher…
Forest seem to have got it into their heads that had the dropball been given to them that they would have gone on to score and it’s that delusional thinking that is causing them to be pissed off.
6 Likes
It’s true that teams usually score directly from a drop ball. It’s as good as a penalty really.
Certainly is a solid reason to spit at a child.
1 Like
Sort out your punctuation or cynical will be notified 
1 Like
I believe your response is the most honest and I respect the fact that you are at least consistent …and if that same scenario were to play out on Sunday, for once I would be joining you and I suspect some of those above criticising Forest fans for their outrage would also be piling in. Let’s hope though that we beat them without any controversial officiating…
2 Likes
…and now your gonna belieeeeeve us…
I’m sorry but I would rate it on stages of play.
It was 2 minutes afterwards, in fact if someone didn’t even mention it I’d not have noticed.
I’m not particularly sure about the pen on Danns and I can see why it’s not given. But this is just a storm in a teacup. It demonstrates as with the darts at the weekend, people who watch the sport don’t seem to understand it.
It’s a mistake by the ref (sort of though it’s also a foul on Konate technically as contact doesn’t need to be made on dangerous play). As a ref I would blow for that not due to the player going down.
So he’s made error one and then compounded it with error two.
Having made error two we have 2 stages of play, maybe even 3. This means there is no way VAR can intervene anyhow if the ball had been booted up and Nunez had gone through and scored then I’d probably have slightly more time for the complaint.
As it is it’s bollocks as Neville says, that’s my ref perspective and I often mention it on here so don’t say I’m being blind to it. It’s simply nothing, Forrest know this and PGMOL could hide behind the dangerous play aspect of it anyhow if they wanted.
6 Likes
Yeah, the bizarre thing about is it happened in the same sequence where they have a much more reasonable complaint of a potential pen on Gomez. That is the decision that if they are given it turns this from a loss to an almost certain win. Now, I didnt think it was a penalty as it was impossible to say who held whom first, whether the player really needed to go down, and was a good distance away from the ball (all considerations for whether holding is an actual foul), but you see our fans complaining about the one we didnt get (that really didnt meet any of those criteria either hence it not being given) and it just seems like the one the fans would be more likely to focus on. It’s weird that its almost entirely been erased from the discussion in favour of focusing on this bizarre trivial incident.
8 Likes
Yeah, I was relieved when that did not get called back, didn’t think twice about the restart because it was obvious what had happened.
2 Likes
I didn’t even realize the error in the moment because I thought a foul had been awarded for the studs-up samurai kick on Ibou’s head.
Anyway, I understand the frustration from Forest fans. If it was not a foul, then it was clearly an error to award the dropped ball to Kelleher.
But Forest act as though they had no agency when it came to defending against the winner thereafter. It’s not like Liverpool were incorrectly awarded a penalty, or that Forest were incorrectly denied one. They just flat out failed to defend against Nunez. That’s on them, and to blame the dropped ball is a reach.
2 Likes
They had atleast two chances to boot the ball up to kill the attack. Some forest player (CHO I think) attempted to dribble through.
2 Likes
What are you all talking about? Kelleher just kicked it straight into the Forest goal didn’t he?
1 Like
I take exception even to that. At the point the ref is considering whether he has to stop the play forest are not in possession of the ball. That happened after he’d decided he needed to stop the play, but seemingly after the whistle then sounded. It’s a borderline call as to how technical we get about the ruling and, as we saw with the first half, the safe call of giving it back to the keeper is common here
1 Like
Yep and the absurdity is, it depends on the timing of ref blowing his whistle rather than where the event occurred. (According to current interpretation)
It’s dumb. if Forest had attacked like the fans/pundits say they missed the opportunity to, the ball would likely have been back on the box. If the ref blew then the “correct decision” would be to give the keeper the ball.
They are arguing a technicality, that they insist turned the game. Basically it took the ref 5 seconds before he blew his whistle. First 4 of those no one was in possession/ball in the box.
It’s the only rule I can think of that relies upon ref timing.
1 Like
Watch the incident with Joe, he is actually fouled and almost dragged over before he then pulls on his opponent the foul should have gone in Joes favour
In the words of our number 4: “Who cares?”
1 Like
I’d actually be over the fucking moon if we beat them in the most controversial circumstances imaginable.
Reading about the meltdown would be almost as satisfying as taking the 3 points
3 Likes
