Jump to content

AFC Bournemouth 0 - 0 Latics


Recommended Posts

Last 0-0 was against Charlton near the end of last season during that awful spell when we couldn't score for toffee.

 

During the 17 game spell from 05/02/11 to 25/04/11, we scored only 7 goals.

 

In his 17 games so far, Shefki Kuqi has scored 12 on his own!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone should add AFC Bournemouth V Latics to his long list of Controversies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_D%27Urso How he's still reffing I'll never know seems to have pissed a lot of teams off.

 

My favourite one is:

 

"In this game, D'Urso gave a red card to Leeds United's Aidan White for a professional foul as last man. Replays showed that White had in fact been fouled initially and as White tumbled to the crowd Ipswich's Jay Emmanuel-Thomas accidentally tripped over White. Later in the match, it appeared that Leeds' Max Gradel was fouled in the Ipswich penalty area. D'Urso ignored what was a clear penalty and only moments later Ipswich scored the winner from a heavily deflected shot. Ipswich manager Paul Jewell acknowledged after the game that his side had received a number of lucky decisions and that Leeds should have been given a penalty."

 

Butthurt Leeds fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the "goal" it looks like a cracking finish from Simpson.

 

Even without goal-line technology, it's obvious that it's crossed the line.

 

Even without being able to see the ball and the line some basic common sense tells you that it must have crossed the line. The big postie things that hold the bar up are a clue for all as to where the line actually is.

 

Even without a lesson in basic geometry, the only outcome of a shot from that angle that is dealt with so late by defender / keeper is that it must have crossed the line.

 

D'urso and his lino really messed up there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the "goal" it looks like a cracking finish from Simpson.

 

Even without goal-line technology, it's obvious that it's crossed the line.

 

Even without being able to see the ball and the line some basic common sense tells you that it must have crossed the line. The big postie things that hold the bar up are a clue for all as to where the line actually is.

 

Even without a lesson in basic geometry, the only outcome of a shot from that angle that is dealt with so late by defender / keeper is that it must have crossed the line.

 

D'urso and his lino really messed up there.

Saw the 'goal' at Bournemouth and saw it again on the televised highlights - inconclusive from the camera angle unfortunately - reckon it was difficult for the ref/linesman to give based on that - even allowing for their better angle. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw the 'goal' at Bournemouth and saw it again on the televised highlights - inconclusive from the camera angle unfortunately - reckon it was difficult for the ref/linesman to give based on that - even allowing for their better angle. :unsure:

 

Position of keeper and defender plus the posts and the crossbar say goal. You don't need DNA evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw the 'goal' at Bournemouth and saw it again on the televised highlights - inconclusive from the camera angle unfortunately - reckon it was difficult for the ref/linesman to give based on that - even allowing for their better angle. :unsure:

^ what he said. I just saw it too. Impossible to tell on the telly. Don't know where the ref was in relation to the ball, but not surprised he didn't give it. Still a :censored:ter though......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ what he said. I just saw it too. Impossible to tell on the telly. Don't know where the ref was in relation to the ball, but not surprised he didn't give it. Still a :censored:ter though......

 

from the highlights on FLS, i couldnt tell, but generally the reaction of the players tell you things like that. it was crowded but i can see why it wasnt given. how hard is it to give the fourth official a replay and advise the ref? then they could have watched it two or three times and decided to give or not. might not have gone for us with that yesterday but a couple of looks might have given the ref/linesmen a bitter view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from the highlights on FLS, i couldnt tell, but generally the reaction of the players tell you things like that. it was crowded but i can see why it wasnt given. how hard is it to give the fourth official a replay and advise the ref? then they could have watched it two or three times and decided to give or not. might not have gone for us with that yesterday but a couple of looks might have given the ref/linesmen a bitter view.

 

TV replay could have made no difference, you can't see the ball cross the line from it. It's a :censored:ter of a decision because you'd think the ref or lino should have seen it but TV would make no difference to it at all. I can only really go off ice hockey which is the main sport I watch which has TV cameras for goalline decisions and I've seen times before when the puck has slipped through a gap between the goalie's glove and the ice and the edge of the goalie's glove is on the line. It's evidently a goal, everyone knows it. Common sense and logic dictate. However, the glove is on the line and even though the everyone knows the puck went over the line, you can't actually see it because the glove is in the way. It's therefore not a goal.

 

You can't start giving things off players' reactions and assumptions on what you don't actually see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TV replay could have made no difference, you can't see the ball cross the line from it. It's a :censored:ter of a decision because you'd think the ref or lino should have seen it but TV would make no difference to it at all. I can only really go off ice hockey which is the main sport I watch which has TV cameras for goalline decisions and I've seen times before when the puck has slipped through a gap between the goalie's glove and the ice and the edge of the goalie's glove is on the line. It's evidently a goal, everyone knows it. Common sense and logic dictate. However, the glove is on the line and even though the everyone knows the puck went over the line, you can't actually see it because the glove is in the way. It's therefore not a goal.

 

You can't start giving things off players' reactions and assumptions on what you don't actually see.

 

It was a tricky one for the ref and his assistant, they have to be 100% sure - and in real time the goalmouth was so crowded their vision might have been obscured. If they had awarded a goal similar to that incident to Bournemouth we would still have been peeved.

Edited by BP1960
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We thought it was in, purely based on the fact that every Latics player turned away to celebrate and only a couple of Bournemouth players kept on going. The rest looked resigned to the fact we'd scored. Talking to a Bournemouth supporter after the game he, along with practically the entire stand at that end, saw that it was in. By about a foot, he said.

 

But he also said that the lino's view would have been obscured by the body of the bloke who cleared the ball (and one or two others as well, no doubt) and couldn't possibly have seen whether it had crossed the line.

 

D'urso made some odd decisions at times, but maybe he couldn't be blamed for that one because he couldn't be sure. There was a fair bit of traffic in the penalty area, so his view could have been blocked.

 

For me, it could have been a different outcome if Taylor hadn't been injured. He looked as if he could run rings round their full back any time he wanted and, although Adeyemi didn't have a bad game, he didn't have the same threat as the ginger winger.

 

All round, it wasn't a bad performance and we looked good when we got it down and passed it around. A few passes went astray, but you expect that in League 1. Even though Simpson was a bit below par, it was worth having him on just for his free kicks.

 

But still a real pisser that goal-line technology is about 10 years too late; if it ever comes in, that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We thought it was in, purely based on the fact that every Latics player turned away to celebrate and only a couple of Bournemouth players kept on going. The rest looked resigned to the fact we'd scored. Talking to a Bournemouth supporter after the game he, along with practically the entire stand at that end, saw that it was in. By about a foot, he said.

 

But he also said that the lino's view would have been obscured by the body of the bloke who cleared the ball (and one or two others as well, no doubt) and couldn't possibly have seen whether it had crossed the line.

 

D'urso made some odd decisions at times, but maybe he couldn't be blamed for that one because he couldn't be sure. There was a fair bit of traffic in the penalty area, so his view could have been blocked.

 

For me, it could have been a different outcome if Taylor hadn't been injured. He looked as if he could run rings round their full back any time he wanted and, although Adeyemi didn't have a bad game, he didn't have the same threat as the ginger winger.

 

All round, it wasn't a bad performance and we looked good when we got it down and passed it around. A few passes went astray, but you expect that in League 1. Even though Simpson was a bit below par, it was worth having him on just for his free kicks.

 

But still a real pisser that goal-line technology is about 10 years too late; if it ever comes in, that is.

 

21 years, 7 months…too bleedin' late

 

11th April 1990 FA CUP SEMI-FINAL REPLAY

 

Manchester United (0) 1 Oldham Athletic (1) 2

McClair Henry, Ritchie

 

 

No extra-time needed….

 

:censored: Frank Lampard and the overpaid England pansies, this was THE travesty….

 

 

Henry's effort, conveniently omitted…

Edited by oafcprozac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Impossible.

Tottenham supporting work colleagues said what about the view from the other angles?

It's League One says I!

IT clearly goes past the goalpost, and their players goes down, but then ends up bakc on line with goalpost bobbing up and the keep pounces on it.

It kinda goes backwards from where both their players are.

NJot as clear cut as Roy and Gordon implied.

But I could not comentate without the benefit of replays and being miles away.

Edited by singe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...