Also, Forest fans, we have enough whining on here as it is with ‘The Samaritans’ gold star customers Arab and SE 85, we don’t need you lot to add to it.
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've only seen one angle to be fair on I think M of D, but from that Danilo didn't appear to put a tackle in. What ever contact was made didn't justify Rashford's dive.
Brennan Johnson kept getting booked for diving last season over far more serious challenges than that.
I've only seen one angle to be fair on I think M of D, but from that Danilo didn't appear to put a tackle in
….
He didn’t put a tackle in. He stuck his leg out and Rashfords momentum mean that it tripped him up. This is why there was very little appeal against the decision from the Forest players.
You would expect a penalty if that was against you.
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've only seen one angle to be fair on I think M of D, but from that Danilo didn't appear to put a tackle in. What ever contact was made didn't justify Rashford's dive.
Brennan Johnson kept getting booked for diving last season over far more serious challenges than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the angle on the link above, it's clear as day
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 7 hours, 16 minutes ago
Switch the situations around, and if a United player had committed the same foul and not been sent off, and a Forest player had been fouled in the box but no penalty was given you'd have the same poster writing "Chinatown, you get nothing at Old Trafford"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we did see it the other way round in the game when Boly was clearly pushed over in the box about 5 minutes from full time. No review nothing.
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
just watch the video again. It was a clear foul, therefore a penalty.
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
just watch the video again. It was a clear foul, therefore a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RB&W
I think we are dealing with a very blind individual here.
So, every time two players ‘brush’ against each other, outside the penalty area, it’s a foul, if that’s the rule in the area that’s the rule outside the area, their is no difference. Be real, the fact that two players,mi won’t even say
, two players, i won’t even say collide, ‘brush’ against each other is not a foul, there was no intent, it was hardly even a coming together. If that’s a penalty, then there should be at least a dozen penalties per match, contact is allowed, fouling isn’t, and certainly Danilo did not foul Rashford, Rashford merely looked for the slightest contact and hit the floor, as he is entitled to do, no way the Ref should be buying that, but he did, and didn’t have the bottle to even check his decision. At some point the Ref’s will stop cheating and make better, more informed, thought out decisions.
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 2 minutes ago
, two players, i won’t even say collide, ‘brush’ against each other is not a foul, there was no intent, it was hardly even a coming together. If that’s a penalty, then there should be at least a dozen penalties per match, contact is allowed, fouling isn’t, and certainly Danilo did not foul Rashford, Rashford merely looked for the slightest contact and hit the floor, as he is entitled to do, no way the Ref should be buying that, but he did, and didn’t have the bottle to even check his decision. At some point the Ref’s will stop cheating and make better, more informed, thought out decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
if you cant see that the player in blue deliberately pushed his knee into Rashfords thigh, (he made no attempt whatsoever to play the ball with his foot... he just opted to play the man with his knee) which was enough for Rashford go down, either consiously or not, (as you rightly condede, he has a right to do that) at speed. Its not Rashfords fault that the full back decided to do that, either because he was too thick and thought he could get away with it, or that Rashford skinned him with pace.
It didnt warrant a red, I dont think, but having said that it was a 'professional foul' (opting to play the man rather than the ball always is), Unless the ref was thinking that the foul denied a goalscoring opportunity. Which is a red.
But of course, you know this.
Unless they are putting something different into Nottinghamshire tap water these days.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 14 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
just watch the video again. It was a clear foul, therefore a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RB&W
I think we are dealing with a very blind individual here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I love the irony in your comment.
Basically no one outside (I would say Manchester but London is probably more appropriate) thinks it was a penalty.
At full speed yes it looks like a pen but if you pause the video you shared and go frame by frame you can see daylight between the two in every frame.
Far from being blind I'm just diligent.
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 14 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
just watch the video again. It was a clear foul, therefore a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RB&W
I think we are dealing with a very blind individual here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I love the irony in your comment.
Basically no one outside (I would say Manchester but London is probably more appropriate) thinks it was a penalty.
At full speed yes it looks like a pen but if you pause the video you shared and go frame by frame you can see daylight between the two in every frame.
Far from being blind I'm just diligent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of us are aware that is slow motion makes things look worse that they are and VAR is no exception to this. Study the concept of slow motion bias. Explore the relation between time overestimation and increased perceived intentionality. You are not being diligent, you are being a bit thick. Normal for Notts fans. Scabs.
At full speed yes it looks like a pen but if you pause the video you shared and go frame by frame you can see daylight between the two in every frame.
------------------
The level of delusion hers is quite literally outstanding. You literally see the Forest defender's knee give way as a result of the contact. I mean, honestly....
At full speed yes it looks like a pen
------------------
I would say there is your answer, btw.
If you think you have slowed that video down and watched it frame by frame, you either have far too much time on your hands or you don't know what a frame is.
It's a shame football is played in normal speed according to the laws of physics and not in slow motion. If only football was played in slow motion then refs would have plenty of time to get everything correct. They would probably even be able to predict future pandemics, predict when someone is about to start growing cancers in their bodies, predict when the next asteroid is going to hit Earth. Just a shame the eye can only perceive time as it is, damn evolution!
I'm glad a Nottingham Forest fan said above yes at normal speed it looks like a foul.
Glad we could clear that up after 40 comments lol
It’s amazing what years of getting your own way does to the mind.
Everyone in football wrong.
Man United and MoTD right.
“Study the concept of slow motion bias. Explore the relation between time overestimation and increased perceived intentionality.”
Pretty lazy typing in slow-motion bias into google….then quoting the exact first sentence you read.
Unless you are Norman Huttner?
And you have the audacity to call someone else thick, you dumb Manc Count.
So here’s one last question for you, if the Rashford incident was a penalty, minimal contact, then can you tell me how the Onana incident against Wolves wasn’t a penalty, sure there was more/clearer contact on that occasion. But the ref decided that amount of contact didn’t warrant a penalty, and was ok to play on.
I for one am baffled.
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 7 minutes ago
So here’s one last question for you, if the Rashford incident was a penalty, minimal contact, then can you tell me how the Onana incident against Wolves wasn’t a penalty, sure there was more/clearer contact on that occasion. But the ref decided that amount of contact didn’t warrant a penalty, and was ok to play on.
I for one am baffled.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who's saying Onana's wasn't a penalty?
The ref and VAR, they are the only ones that count.
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 1 minute ago
The ref and VAR, they are the only ones that count.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They got Onana's wrong and Rashford's right.
You're concentrating on the wrong thing, the sending off's the debatable one.
comment by Morninchile (U18154)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
It’s amazing what years of getting your own way does to the mind.
Everyone in football wrong.
Man United and MoTD right.
“Study the concept of slow motion bias. Explore the relation between time overestimation and increased perceived intentionality.”
Pretty lazy typing in slow-motion bias into google….then quoting the exact first sentence you read.
Unless you are Norman Huttner?
And you have the audacity to call someone else thick, you dumb Manc Count.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And yet you did exactly the same thing. Funny that.
And that still doesnt mean that slow mo bias doesnt actually exist. Unfortunately for you Notts Forest scabs.
comment by Unitedy (U17162)
posted 4 hours, 41 minutes ago
It's a shame football is played in normal speed according to the laws of physics and not in slow motion. If only football was played in slow motion then refs would have plenty of time to get everything correct. They would probably even be able to predict future pandemics, predict when someone is about to start growing cancers in their bodies, predict when the next asteroid is going to hit Earth. Just a shame the eye can only perceive time as it is, damn evolution!
I'm glad a Nottingham Forest fan said above yes at normal speed it looks like a foul.
Glad we could clear that up after 40 comments lol
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm stunned. I point out that VAR should be reviewing in slow motion to understand what actually happened and you then jump on the "it looked like a pen at normal speed".
VAR are supposed to be able to review and help to clear up the obvious mistakes which none united fans and most pundits have clearly stated it was.
You keep thinking its Forest fans that are wrong. All we are highlighting is that you get the benefit of a very questionable set of decisions (again) and a draw would have been a fair result.
You've ignored the push on Boly in the united box that was also a clear mistake and not reviewed by VAR.
It's not just about the penalty award but throughout the game there were multiple incorrect decisions in favour of united.
Anyway you keep believing that it's my eyesight and everyone else is deluded if that makes you happy.
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
Unfortunately for you Notts Forest scabs.
---------------------------
I think somebody's a little upset.
Sign in if you want to comment
Chinatown
Page 2 of 3
posted on 29/8/23
Also, Forest fans, we have enough whining on here as it is with ‘The Samaritans’ gold star customers Arab and SE 85, we don’t need you lot to add to it.
posted on 29/8/23
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've only seen one angle to be fair on I think M of D, but from that Danilo didn't appear to put a tackle in. What ever contact was made didn't justify Rashford's dive.
Brennan Johnson kept getting booked for diving last season over far more serious challenges than that.
posted on 29/8/23
I've only seen one angle to be fair on I think M of D, but from that Danilo didn't appear to put a tackle in
….
He didn’t put a tackle in. He stuck his leg out and Rashfords momentum mean that it tripped him up. This is why there was very little appeal against the decision from the Forest players.
You would expect a penalty if that was against you.
posted on 29/8/23
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've only seen one angle to be fair on I think M of D, but from that Danilo didn't appear to put a tackle in. What ever contact was made didn't justify Rashford's dive.
Brennan Johnson kept getting booked for diving last season over far more serious challenges than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the angle on the link above, it's clear as day
posted on 29/8/23
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
posted on 29/8/23
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 7 hours, 16 minutes ago
Switch the situations around, and if a United player had committed the same foul and not been sent off, and a Forest player had been fouled in the box but no penalty was given you'd have the same poster writing "Chinatown, you get nothing at Old Trafford"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we did see it the other way round in the game when Boly was clearly pushed over in the box about 5 minutes from full time. No review nothing.
posted on 29/8/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
posted on 29/8/23
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
just watch the video again. It was a clear foul, therefore a penalty.
posted on 29/8/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
just watch the video again. It was a clear foul, therefore a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RB&W
I think we are dealing with a very blind individual here.
posted on 29/8/23
So, every time two players ‘brush’ against each other, outside the penalty area, it’s a foul, if that’s the rule in the area that’s the rule outside the area, their is no difference. Be real, the fact that two players,mi won’t even say
posted on 29/8/23
, two players, i won’t even say collide, ‘brush’ against each other is not a foul, there was no intent, it was hardly even a coming together. If that’s a penalty, then there should be at least a dozen penalties per match, contact is allowed, fouling isn’t, and certainly Danilo did not foul Rashford, Rashford merely looked for the slightest contact and hit the floor, as he is entitled to do, no way the Ref should be buying that, but he did, and didn’t have the bottle to even check his decision. At some point the Ref’s will stop cheating and make better, more informed, thought out decisions.
posted on 29/8/23
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 2 minutes ago
, two players, i won’t even say collide, ‘brush’ against each other is not a foul, there was no intent, it was hardly even a coming together. If that’s a penalty, then there should be at least a dozen penalties per match, contact is allowed, fouling isn’t, and certainly Danilo did not foul Rashford, Rashford merely looked for the slightest contact and hit the floor, as he is entitled to do, no way the Ref should be buying that, but he did, and didn’t have the bottle to even check his decision. At some point the Ref’s will stop cheating and make better, more informed, thought out decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
if you cant see that the player in blue deliberately pushed his knee into Rashfords thigh, (he made no attempt whatsoever to play the ball with his foot... he just opted to play the man with his knee) which was enough for Rashford go down, either consiously or not, (as you rightly condede, he has a right to do that) at speed. Its not Rashfords fault that the full back decided to do that, either because he was too thick and thought he could get away with it, or that Rashford skinned him with pace.
It didnt warrant a red, I dont think, but having said that it was a 'professional foul' (opting to play the man rather than the ball always is), Unless the ref was thinking that the foul denied a goalscoring opportunity. Which is a red.
But of course, you know this.
Unless they are putting something different into Nottinghamshire tap water these days.
posted on 30/8/23
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 14 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
just watch the video again. It was a clear foul, therefore a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RB&W
I think we are dealing with a very blind individual here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I love the irony in your comment.
Basically no one outside (I would say Manchester but London is probably more appropriate) thinks it was a penalty.
At full speed yes it looks like a pen but if you pause the video you shared and go frame by frame you can see daylight between the two in every frame.
Far from being blind I'm just diligent.
posted on 30/8/23
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 14 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by ForestofFleet (U15852)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 5 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 1 hour, 13 minutes ago
comment by The Post Nearly Man (U1270)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Red Forest Bear [More Salt On That?] (U6288)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Striketeam7 - yeah. I thought the red card was a bit harsh - definitely a professional foul but it wasn't clear to me that Bruno would have got to the ball first, and I'd be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the defending team in that scenario. Because it was a subjective case of interpreting that, it wasn't a 'clear and obvious error' that VAR would send the ref to the screen to review, but I thought it was harsh, and maybe a yellow card 7 times out of 10.
The penalty though I thought was pretty clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You should have gone to spec savers
and lay off the vodka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems a pretty fair analysis to me.
There's a different angle for the penalty decision here, would you have wanted it given for Forest?
https://twitter.com/Anshum1958/status/1696379806336893303?s=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a pen all day...the red was harsh, but this I really dont see the uproar over.
Would genuinely like to see your question answered by any Forest fans here...if that was at the other end and it wasn't given, what would your thoughts be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i wouldnt bother trying to reason with him. He is clearly still quite upset and emotional that his team let a 0-2 lead vanish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch the challenge in slow motion (like VAR are supposed to do). It is quite clear that if there was any contact it was a thread of the sock but it in no way justified the outlandish dive from Rashford.
The lack of Forest players complaining about the decision - They clearly were but unlike United we don't try to intimidate the Ref by surrounding them to make a point.
Yes its frustrating that we lost a 2 goal lead. But if you look at the collective set of decisions throughout the game it's hard to say that they evened themselves out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
just watch the video again. It was a clear foul, therefore a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RB&W
I think we are dealing with a very blind individual here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I love the irony in your comment.
Basically no one outside (I would say Manchester but London is probably more appropriate) thinks it was a penalty.
At full speed yes it looks like a pen but if you pause the video you shared and go frame by frame you can see daylight between the two in every frame.
Far from being blind I'm just diligent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of us are aware that is slow motion makes things look worse that they are and VAR is no exception to this. Study the concept of slow motion bias. Explore the relation between time overestimation and increased perceived intentionality. You are not being diligent, you are being a bit thick. Normal for Notts fans. Scabs.
posted on 30/8/23
At full speed yes it looks like a pen but if you pause the video you shared and go frame by frame you can see daylight between the two in every frame.
------------------
The level of delusion hers is quite literally outstanding. You literally see the Forest defender's knee give way as a result of the contact. I mean, honestly....
posted on 30/8/23
At full speed yes it looks like a pen
------------------
I would say there is your answer, btw.
If you think you have slowed that video down and watched it frame by frame, you either have far too much time on your hands or you don't know what a frame is.
posted on 30/8/23
It's a shame football is played in normal speed according to the laws of physics and not in slow motion. If only football was played in slow motion then refs would have plenty of time to get everything correct. They would probably even be able to predict future pandemics, predict when someone is about to start growing cancers in their bodies, predict when the next asteroid is going to hit Earth. Just a shame the eye can only perceive time as it is, damn evolution!
I'm glad a Nottingham Forest fan said above yes at normal speed it looks like a foul.
Glad we could clear that up after 40 comments lol
posted on 30/8/23
It’s amazing what years of getting your own way does to the mind.
Everyone in football wrong.
Man United and MoTD right.
“Study the concept of slow motion bias. Explore the relation between time overestimation and increased perceived intentionality.”
Pretty lazy typing in slow-motion bias into google….then quoting the exact first sentence you read.
Unless you are Norman Huttner?
And you have the audacity to call someone else thick, you dumb Manc Count.
posted on 30/8/23
So here’s one last question for you, if the Rashford incident was a penalty, minimal contact, then can you tell me how the Onana incident against Wolves wasn’t a penalty, sure there was more/clearer contact on that occasion. But the ref decided that amount of contact didn’t warrant a penalty, and was ok to play on.
I for one am baffled.
posted on 30/8/23
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 7 minutes ago
So here’s one last question for you, if the Rashford incident was a penalty, minimal contact, then can you tell me how the Onana incident against Wolves wasn’t a penalty, sure there was more/clearer contact on that occasion. But the ref decided that amount of contact didn’t warrant a penalty, and was ok to play on.
I for one am baffled.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who's saying Onana's wasn't a penalty?
posted on 30/8/23
The ref and VAR, they are the only ones that count.
posted on 30/8/23
comment by reddave (U8660)
posted 1 minute ago
The ref and VAR, they are the only ones that count.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They got Onana's wrong and Rashford's right.
You're concentrating on the wrong thing, the sending off's the debatable one.
posted on 30/8/23
comment by Morninchile (U18154)
posted 1 hour, 46 minutes ago
It’s amazing what years of getting your own way does to the mind.
Everyone in football wrong.
Man United and MoTD right.
“Study the concept of slow motion bias. Explore the relation between time overestimation and increased perceived intentionality.”
Pretty lazy typing in slow-motion bias into google….then quoting the exact first sentence you read.
Unless you are Norman Huttner?
And you have the audacity to call someone else thick, you dumb Manc Count.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And yet you did exactly the same thing. Funny that.
And that still doesnt mean that slow mo bias doesnt actually exist. Unfortunately for you Notts Forest scabs.
posted on 30/8/23
comment by Unitedy (U17162)
posted 4 hours, 41 minutes ago
It's a shame football is played in normal speed according to the laws of physics and not in slow motion. If only football was played in slow motion then refs would have plenty of time to get everything correct. They would probably even be able to predict future pandemics, predict when someone is about to start growing cancers in their bodies, predict when the next asteroid is going to hit Earth. Just a shame the eye can only perceive time as it is, damn evolution!
I'm glad a Nottingham Forest fan said above yes at normal speed it looks like a foul.
Glad we could clear that up after 40 comments lol
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm stunned. I point out that VAR should be reviewing in slow motion to understand what actually happened and you then jump on the "it looked like a pen at normal speed".
VAR are supposed to be able to review and help to clear up the obvious mistakes which none united fans and most pundits have clearly stated it was.
You keep thinking its Forest fans that are wrong. All we are highlighting is that you get the benefit of a very questionable set of decisions (again) and a draw would have been a fair result.
You've ignored the push on Boly in the united box that was also a clear mistake and not reviewed by VAR.
It's not just about the penalty award but throughout the game there were multiple incorrect decisions in favour of united.
Anyway you keep believing that it's my eyesight and everyone else is deluded if that makes you happy.
posted on 30/8/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
Unfortunately for you Notts Forest scabs.
---------------------------
I think somebody's a little upset.
Page 2 of 3