If you understand the offside rule then you would know the offside would be judged from this moment. You can not even see the player in question in the frame? So it is impossible to say he is onside because of this video.
-
All - as you will understand, the forum is exceptionally busy at this time. The admins and moderators simply don't have time to read every post in every thread. Could you PLEASE use the "Report" option below a post to flag any content that you feel we need to be aware of. We'll review everything reported as a priority and deal with it accordingly. Thank you.
Snatchday 1: Nottingham Forest Vs the PGMOL
- Thread starter Alf-engelos Mindminackers
- Start date
Red Echo
Youth Team
It was very tight - that other clip is quite misleading.
Robertson
Viv Anderson
Used to be something in the rules about daylight if I remember correctly?
Most peoples anger is based on scepticism that the technology is accurate enough to make a call like yesterday. And more importantly if it really needs to be. There should be a margin of error.
Pre-VAR the Coventry player was level, and onside, by any sensible interpretation of the rules. The linesman did not flag.
Change the damn rules with respect to VAR and offside.
Most peoples anger is based on scepticism that the technology is accurate enough to make a call like yesterday. And more importantly if it really needs to be. There should be a margin of error.
Pre-VAR the Coventry player was level, and onside, by any sensible interpretation of the rules. The linesman did not flag.
Change the damn rules with respect to VAR and offside.
GOBIAS
Ian Bowyer
Back then the standard of penalties were different. Over the last couple of years to my dismay and touch in the area is considered a good shout and will often be given.
Initially a player trying to instigate the contact and going over was waved away. I remember Yates trying it on versus Liverpool in the QF and he put his foot on Alisons glove and went down. The Huddersfield ones were like that, certainly Toffolo’s was, O’Brien was a bit more clever.
chaospunx
Geoff Thomas
Mr. Blonde
Jack Burkitt
The plot thickens...
Nottingham Forest did not ask for VAR official to be changed
Nottingham Forest did not ask for Stuart Attwell to be taken off video assistant referee duties for their match against Everton, BBC Sport has been told.
www.bbc.co.uk
Statto
Free Kick Specialist
They didn't because they can't. But they may well have still raised the concern with PGMOL that shatwell was a supporter of a relegation rival.The plot thickens...
Nottingham Forest did not ask for VAR official to be changed
Nottingham Forest did not ask for Stuart Attwell to be taken off video assistant referee duties for their match against Everton, BBC Sport has been told.www.bbc.co.uk
MaxiRobriguez
Bob McKinlay
The plot thickens...
Nottingham Forest did not ask for VAR official to be changed
Nottingham Forest did not ask for Stuart Attwell to be taken off video assistant referee duties for their match against Everton, BBC Sport has been told.www.bbc.co.uk
The article doesn't say who told the BBC this (hint: It's PGMOL)
Nor does it confirm the fact we are not allowed to ask for refs to be changed.
Whitewashing.
Alf-engelos Mindminackers
The Artiste formally known as "Wanksy"
Some fans view, and a very interesting one from a Luton fan at the start, stating that Luton fans wanted Forest to win so Atwell was far from bias 
...
...
Mr. Blonde
Jack Burkitt
I think the whole 'Atwell is a Luton fan' thing is a massive red herring, to be honestSome fans view, and a very interesting one from a Luton fan at the start, stating that Luton fans wanted Forest to win so Atwell was far from bias
You could argue for any result yesterday benefitting Luton, eg. an Everton loss would have been beneficial given Luton still have to play them and so could have leapfrogged them if us and Luton both beat them
Statto
Free Kick Specialist
How does that logic even work?Some fans view, and a very interesting one from a Luton fan at the start, stating that Luton fans wanted Forest to win so Atwell was far from bias
Before the match
16 Everton 27
17 Forest 26
18 Luton 25
Now it is
16 Everton 30
17 Forest 26
18 Luton 25
but a Forest win would have meant it would be
16 Forest 29
17 Everton 27
18 Luton 25
So with that outcome they would have been 2 points off safety as opposed to 1 and with Everton playing a game less (admittedly against Liverpool).
Both teams are also appealing deductions but as Everton's 2nd deduction is only 2 points that won't put them any higher than 32 (or 29 if we'd won) but we could get up to 4 back which would be 33 if we'd won and 30 if we didn't.
Lefkasman
Ian Bowyer
I've been to a few games. Usually at Bath where I am accompanied by my mate so he can explain everything to me. It usually involves vast quantities of beer so I've usually forgotten what he's told me when we go again.
Sent from my 23124RA7EO using Tapatalk
MaxiRobriguez
Bob McKinlay
and a very interesting one from a Luton fan at the start, stating that Luton fans wanted Forest to win so Atwell was far from bias
Sure.
And we wanted Luton to beat Brentford.... to motivating us to try harder....
... or something.
Nonsense. Obvious worst result for Luton yesterday was a Forest win.
Notcher
Stuart Pearce
Pretty much as I expected. We're not allowed to ask for an official to be removed. The most we could do is make them aware and hope they come to the sensible conclusion themselves. Obviously we've burned the house down afterwards but at the time that's as much as we could sayThe plot thickens...
Nottingham Forest did not ask for VAR official to be changed
Nottingham Forest did not ask for Stuart Attwell to be taken off video assistant referee duties for their match against Everton, BBC Sport has been told.www.bbc.co.uk
Last edited:
MaxiRobriguez
Bob McKinlay
Agree. I think it's distracting away from the fact that pretty much every referee has given us dross this season.
They're not all Luton fans, but they all seemingly want to disenfranchise Forest. Suggests motive is something else.
Exactly, They are missing the point Forest made 'we warned the PGMOL' that isn't a request whatsoever.
Statto
Free Kick Specialist
Yes but having shatwell in there when his team's main rivals for relegation are playing (and one whom they need to catch in terms of points) is a massive conflict of interest in general especially when it's actually the team above too.
There are plenty of select group officials so don't see why they couldn't change it, surely shatwell wasn't the only one available?
It's just a massive open goal from PGMOL for the club to kick a stink into. if the VAR was a newcastle fan no-one would have cared at all.
I've no legal knowledge but surely that would involve a court case where all of Mr Attwell's decisions could be scrutinized from previous games. Maybe that's the long game, are the club trying to bait the PGMOL into a court case.
Mr. Blonde
Jack Burkitt
Luton still have to play Everton so you could argue that a Forest win was favourable as it would give them a greater chance of leapfrogging Everton
As I said in a previous post, you could make a case for any of the three outcomes of yesterday benefitting Luton
Statto
Free Kick Specialist
Not necessarily. I'm sure one of the qualified eagles like @Mr. Blonde on here would confirm but for it to be defamatory all the person who is allegedly being defamed has to demonstrate that the comment has been defamatory (i.e. that in the eyes of a reasonable member of the public their reputation has been diminished or that they have lost money/work as a result of the comment) and then it's down to the person making the comment to prove it is true.
So if shatwell has been defamed by the comment then after he'd proved this the club would have to prove that the comment made was true and that shatwell deliberately made wrong decisions to bias the game because he is a Luton fan. If they couldn't prove this he would win.
Of course, you can't defame someone of bad reputation anyway so if someone took out a page in the mail saying Prince Andrew was a petty thief as he's already considered to be a ***** then even if it wasn't true he hadn't been defamed. Nor can you defame an alias or nickname.
Truth is the obvious defence - but you still have to prove it
Statto
Free Kick Specialist
True but keeping the closer team closer makes it easier because they still have to beat Everton.
Mr. Blonde
Jack Burkitt
Oh aye I think an Everton win was the most logical best result for Luton, I was just making the point that you could make a case for any of the three possible outcomes
Notcher
Stuart Pearce
Reading the comments underneath this is another example of virtually every single one agreeing.
The funniest part though is Souness saying they aren't biased and then immediately in the next sentence confirming they are biased.
The funniest part though is Souness saying they aren't biased and then immediately in the next sentence confirming they are biased.
