[Archived] Rovers 1 West Ham 2

[RevidgeBlue]

Aha Den! There you go again; introducing the conspiracy theory. I am afraid that this unhappy episode must resolve down to how each one of us chooses to see it. It is either just plain incompetance and non- malicious, or something worse. In the latter case put your own interpretation on it.

There have been countless awful refereeing performances at Ewood over the years which can obviously be put down to incompetence. I'm honestly struggling with Saturday though.

There have been several examples over the years whereby goals that have been over the line have not been given due to the assistant being out of position or having his vision obscured, and him not seeing or not being sure, and correctly or otherwise giving the defending team the benefit of the doubt. Surely that's what you have to do if you're not absolutely sure?

How can you possibly give a goal that's not over the line? I didn't think it was even particularly close. It never occurred to me watching in real time from 70 yards away the ball was in and as you view the picture along the goal line, not only is the whole ball not over the line but you can clearly see most of the ball sticking out past the other side of the post!

Can anyone remember a similar high profile incident when a goal that "wasn't" was given?

[Neil Weaver]

Can anyone remember a similar high profile incident when a goal that "wasn't" was given?

Aye, last year, and would you Adam and Eve it, for West Ham again. A home game, might have been against Boro, can't be sure. Think it was a shot by Sheringham from an angle, hooked off the line by a defender. It wasn't even close but a goal was given. Maybe one of out intrepid researchers can find it.

[LeChuck]

Can anyone remember a similar high profile incident when a goal that "wasn't" was given?

Morten Gamst Pedersen against Newcastle?

[RevidgeBlue]

Morten Gamst Pedersen against Newcastle?

Fair point but that was an infringement that was missed. Very different imo from something that simply didn't happen being imagined by the officials.

Still, don't suppose we were complaining in 1966!

[Jimmy Jupiter]

Morten Gamst Pedersen against Newcastle?

Didn't Paul Gallagher score a pretty dodgy goal against Newcastle also?

[LeChuck]

The ball was probably as far away from a legal part of Pedersen's body as it was from crossing the line on Saturday.

It was a terrible decision, but it's not as far away from being a goal as people are making out:

Part of the ball was on the line. When Mendes was denied a goal against Manchester United, the ball was a long way over the line, certainly more over the line than that one wasn't. It's quite embarrassing that people are claiming bribes/conspiracies etc, especially when we have one person on here who knows the official involved and can vouch for their integrity.

I have no arguments that he shouldn't be involved with Premiership games again though, the man is obviously not up to the standard required, which has unfortunately cost us at least two points.

[FourLaneBlue]

I think if you took the time to look- which certain of you have an agenda for not doing- that most of the good moves came from Dunn's passes.

What does that mean? So if someone doesn't agree about Dunn with you they must have an "agenda"?

[Neil Weaver]

I had the game right, wrong incident but not a bad effort..... match report here. Have a look and listen to the manager and player videos. All of em - including the now England boss (now an FA employee?) call for video evidence. But hey it's only 18 months ago and it wasn't a game involving the 'big' teams.

[RevidgeBlue]

The ball was probably as far away from a legal part of Pedersen's body as it was from crossing the line on Saturday.

It was a terrible decision, but it's not as far away from being a goal as people are making out:

Part of the ball was on the line. When Mendes was denied a goal against Manchester United, the ball was a long way over the line, certainly more over the line than that one wasn't. It's quite embarrassing that people are claiming bribes/conspiracies etc, especially when we have one person on here who knows the official involved and can vouch for their integrity.

I have no arguments that he shouldn't be involved with Premiership games again though, the man is obviously not up to the standard required, which has unfortunately cost us at least two points.

It looks pretty clear cut to me. How far away does it have to be? Should we introduce a new rule that any shot entering the 6 yard box is a goal?

Yet again I have to reiterate that the similarity between the Mendes and Pedersen incidents was that if you're being trying to be fair to the officials you could argue things were MISSED, therefore the correct decisions weren't given..

In this case, something simply didn't happen but was given anyway. Couldn't be more different imo.

i.e. Pedersen/Mendes If Assistant sees either = no goal/goal If he Doesn't see either = goal/no goal

In this case if Assistant sees it = no goal, if he doesn't see it he can't possibly give a goal either!

Looking at the above picture if I was trying to defend the referee I might try and argue that in the glare of the flood lights and the heat of the moment he had mistaken the puddle behind the line the goal for the ball and signalled a goal.

I might, but I wouldn't be convinced in light of his overall performance.

[DaveyB]

It was a terrible decision, but it's not as far away from being a goal as people are making out:

Part of the ball was on the line. When Mendes was denied a goal against Manchester United, the ball was a long way over the line, certainly more over the line than that one wasn't. It's quite embarrassing that people are claiming bribes/conspiracies etc, especially when we have one person on here who knows the official involved and can vouch for their integrity

But that's the point isn't it. I think we would all accept not being given a 'goal' that had crossed the line because unless the linesman can be absolutley 100% sure then he can't give it.

The Mendes one was a shot from a long way out and so the linesman was therefore closer to the halfway line than the goalline and so in a terrible position to be able to judge if the ball had crossed the line. He couldn't be sure and so he didn't give it. It proved to be a terrible decision but an understandable one.

Since the ball didn't cross the line on Saturday there was no way that the linesman could have been 100% sure that it did and so it seems to be more than just a terrible decison and begins to raise questions in people's minds. Was it more than just a simple mistake? Did he have a reason for wanting West Ham to win?

None of us (not even the guy who claims to know him) will ever know for sure. For what it's worth, if it was just that one incident then I probably wouldn't have any doubts about his motives, but the sheer number of 'mistakes' he made, all in favour of one team, have left a nasty feeling that I can't budge. The test for me is that, generally, an incompetent ref/linesman will be bad for both teams, that just didn't appear to be the case on Saturday.

[LeChuck]

In this case, something simply didn't happen but was given anyway. Couldn't be more different imo.

That's a very pedantic seperation of the incidents Rev. All of them are just incorrect decisions; whatever the official(s) thought had happened, in reality, didn't happen.

I'm not trying to excuse the incompetence of the linesman involved, I'm just not buying into this idea that we've been more hard-done to than other teams who have had goal-line decisions go against them.

[Manchester Blue]

That's a very pedantic seperation of the incidents Rev. All of them are just incorrect decisions; whatever the official(s) thought had happened, in reality, didn't happen.

I'm not trying to excuse the incompetence of the linesman involved, I'm just not buying into this idea that we've been more hard-done to than other teams who have had goal-line decisions go against them.

It's not pedantic at all it's correct. You say you're not trying to excuse the incompetence and then you do just that. I think you've brought up the pedersen hand ball every time we have a decision go against us. How many times do we have to have it done to justify it.

There is not excuse at all it is a fact that the linesman either guessed in which case he should be sacked, or he is actualy just incompetent and actually thought it went over the line, in which case he shoud get the kicking of his life.

If anything the Pedersen one just hughlights Revidge's argument. An official can only give what he sees, there have been countless examples of goals scored in the way Pedersen did, and also defenders punching balls away and getting away with it. Sometimes the officials can't see everything. It's when they see things that didn't happen that is beyond a joke and there is nothing pedantic about that.

[thenodrog]

I've missed not having a hate figure around! It's a long time since an official has received the amount of notoriety that Jim Devine has managed. Sure Mike Riley and Uriah Rennie provoke thousands of glances skywards when they walk out before a match but Jim Devine has now achieved the wrong sort of legendary status with Rovers fans. He is right up there now, dining at the top table alongside George Courtney, the late Gerald Ashby and Paul Durkin. The others were of course the men in the middle so this is quite an achievement for a mere lino.

[Paul Mellelieu]

You're letting Webb off the hook there.

Ironically I was telling my fellow Riversiders what a top ref Webb is.

However he is of course a Yorkshireman.

[ace]

You're letting Webb off the hook there.

Ironically I was telling my fellow Riversiders what a top ref Webb is.

However he is of course a Yorkshireman.

I see that blind Boy Devine is actually a police detective in Teeside!

Any defendant should use that tape of the non goal as evidence of his visual accuracy!

[thenodrog]

Drug squad too. Someone should explain that he's supposed to confiscate em ....... not take em!

[AggyBlue]

Drug squad too. Someone should explain that he's supposed to confiscate em ....... not take em!

How does the saying go, 'The only coppers are bent coppers'

[ewoodblue]

How does the saying go, 'The only coppers are bent coppers'

Definitly a case of PC incorrectness.

I think Warnock is right, and that refs and officials that mess up, should serve bans just like the players have too.

To many officials are too arrogant , and don't feel the need to have to explain their incompetence.

[Jan]

Definitly a case of PC incorrectness.

I think Warnock is right, and that refs and officials that mess up, should serve bans just like the players have too.

To many officials are too arrogant , and don't feel the need to have to explain their incompetence.

In any other walk of life, such gross incompetence would merit a sacking

[CAPT KAYOS]

FA ANGERED BY INCIDENT

Shame they couldn't find the antics of the officials at our game unacceptable - as quick as they could this

[Exiled_Rover]

FA ANGERED BY INCIDENT

Shame they couldn't find the antics of the officials at our game unacceptable - as quick as they could this

Or Carvahlo not being dismissed for denying Berbatov a clear goal scoring opportunity. Apparently if Henchoz is 30 yards away from the goal, on the wing, it's a straight red without hesitation. Eight yards out with Berbatov through on goal though, no dice! Disgusting.

[AggyBlue]

FA ANGERED BY INCIDENT

Let's hope that the FA have a look at how the Chelski players goad the oppositions fans when they score a goal.

[Fife Rover]

There have been countless awful refereeing performances at Ewood over the years which can obviously be put down to incompetence. I'm honestly struggling with Saturday though.

There have been several examples over the years whereby goals that have been over the line have not been given due to the assistant being out of position or having his vision obscured, and him not seeing or not being sure, and correctly or otherwise giving the defending team the benefit of the doubt. Surely that's what you have to do if you're not absolutely sure?

How can you possibly give a goal that's not over the line? I didn't think it was even particularly close. It never occurred to me watching in real time from 70 yards away the ball was in and as you view the picture along the goal line, not only is the whole ball not over the line but you can clearly see most of the ball sticking out past the other side of the post!

Can anyone remember a similar high profile incident when a goal that "wasn't" was given?

England v West Germany World Cup Final at Wembley 1966.

[mike at picture]

England v West Germany World Cup Final at Wembley 1966.

You've been in Fife to long.

[Fife Rover]

You've been in Fife to long.

You may be right there Mike Anyway that goal didn't win the WC for England; we scored another one after that so we still won fair and square even if that one had been chalked-off.