He’s not fit to referee – Madley messes up again.

Inept officiating, but City make a gift of the winning goal to Blackburn.


https://mauveandyellowarmy.net/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Inept officiating, but City make a gift of the winning goal to Blackburn.


https://mauveandyellowarmy.net/

---

Good read as always Bob. Cheers

The 2nd on target shot was a rather tame one from Robinson more a back pass but on target all the same.

Everyone at Ewood Park knew that was a valid goal that should have stood except, of course, that ref. Blackburn were resigned to kicking the ball up to the half way line to restart. But...just one example of an inept (biased?) refing performance. Quite literally incredible why our goal wasn't given. Meanwhile our poor performance continues, slipping back into a last season style of play that means scoring is a rarity. Largely as trying to get the round thing into the rectangular thing seems a vague concept for most of the time. Are we deliberately leaving a gap in the centre for KM to fill come January? Right now there seems to be some exclusion zone there. Plus, we only play with any urgency for the last 20 minutes.
Thanks for the write up Bob.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by insider

The 2nd on target shot was a rather tame one from Robinson more a back pass but on target all the same.

---

Thanks, I’ll have to take your word for it though because it’s still not ringing any bells with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanD

Everyone at Ewood Park knew that was a valid goal that should have stood except, of course, that ref. Blackburn were resigned to kicking the ball up to the half way line to restart. But...just one example of an inept (biased?) refing performance. Quite literally incredible why our goal wasn't given. Meanwhile our poor performance continues, slipping back into a last season style of play that means scoring is a rarity. Largely as trying to get the round thing into the rectangular thing seems a vague concept for most of the time. Are we deliberately leaving a gap in the centre for KM to fill come January? Right now there seems to be some exclusion zone there. Plus, we only play with any urgency for the last 20 minutes.
Thanks for the write up Bob.

---

It WAS offside

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobh

It WAS offside

---

I haven’t seen it but I was listening to the radio and they were in agreement that it was offside, after seeing the replays.

I just watched it on ITV's EPL programme and it was offside, albeit marginally, by the letter of the law.

If the defender had stepped up to catch our forward offside in the knowledge that he would be in the line of sight of his goalkeeper, who would be more than likely stood behind himself and as long as the officials do their job disallow the projected "goal", then he'd be getting rave reviews.

I doubt this was the case but when the cross comes in behind him, a defender's reaction is to either try and block a potential effort or step up in the hope things go his way re offside.

ITV showed very brief highlights of the linesman flagging but I understand from others' reports that he didn't originally and Madeley called it so between them it seems they arrived at the decision, whether it was Madeley's persuasive analysis that swung it we will never know for certain.
It was one of those where it could go either way and it is no surprise to me that it didn't go ours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Des Parrot

I haven’t seen it but I was listening to the radio and they were in agreement that it was offside, after seeing the replays.

---

It was offside. The bit that should be up for discussion is whether our player was obstructing the keepers movement-eyeline of ball trajectory, that's where the offside becomes 'live' as he is then interfering with play.

So, the ref has a call to make, not his doing, our player is offside, and he is close to the keeper. Put yourself in his shoes, it's not an easy call to make, or maybe he should listen for the reaction of the crowd, the players, the coaching staff etc in order to make his decision. And it's my opinion that it happened so quickly and from a set piece that players aren't looking at some bloke stood close enough to the keeper, they're all pretty close anyway.

The ref had a legitimate call to make, it may have been wrong in plenty of peoples eyes, but it was legitimate, and i can't understand why people can't get that into their heads. Players know that if you give the ref something to think about then it may go against you. That's football for you.

As for Madley's overall performance, it wasn't great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Inept officiating, but City make a gift of the winning goal to Blackburn.


https://mauveandyellowarmy.net/

---

Bulut has agreed with the ref after the game having seen it but Madley consistently penalised us for things he let Blackburn get away with

He got a premier game after his aberration against us last year against Coventry which led to two letters of apologies do that's how much the club is held in the thoughts of the EFL and pmol

The 2nd on shot target was Robinson as he tried to curl it but under hit it and went straight at the keeper who also pulled off a worldy to stop tanner's effort

My first time to Blackburn but apart from the result it was a good day out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nobody's Rep

Bulut has agreed with the ref after the game having seen it but Madley consistently penalised us for things he let Blackburn get away with

He got a premier game after his aberration against us last year against Coventry which led to two letters of apologies do that's how much the club is held in the thoughts of the EFL and pmol

The 2nd on shot target was Robinson as he tried to curl it but under hit it and went straight at the keeper who also pulled off a worldy to stop tanner's effort

My first time to Blackburn but apart from the result it was a good day out

---

He did let plenty go. Blackburn were very physical with our players when they were holding the ball up or shielding it. There was way too much contact, not just touch tight, there was shirt pulling and leaning in. Madley was weak in that department, he didn't give the free kicks. He doesn't look like a ref who can quietly get a grip on a game, he allowed spoiling tactics and over physical contact and i would say that played into Blackburns hands. There's another way of looking at it as well in my opinion. Blackburn weren't on the end of those types of injustices because they moved the ball better and quicker, so they weren't stuck in those situations where there was no support or an outlet, hence not having to hold onto the ball because there was nothing on. We were in that position plenty of times, play broke down, the move stopped, there wasn't a way out. Doesn't make what Madley let go right, but as professionals players do need to take some responsibility for how the game is panning out and think on their feet so to speak.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

He did let plenty go. Blackburn were very physical with our players when they were holding the ball up or shielding it. There was way too much contact, not just touch tight, there was shirt pulling and leaning in. Madley was weak in that department, he didn't give the free kicks. He doesn't look like a ref who can quietly get a grip on a game, he allowed spoiling tactics and over physical contact and i would say that played into Blackburns hands. There's another way of looking at it as well in my opinion. Blackburn weren't on the end of those types of injustices because they moved the ball better and quicker, so they weren't stuck in those situations where there was no support or an outlet, hence not having to hold onto the ball because there was nothing on. We were in that position plenty of times, play broke down, the move stopped, there wasn't a way out. Doesn't make what Madley let go right, but as professionals players do need to take some responsibility for how the game is panning out and think on their feet so to speak.

---

Totally agree on the 2nd part and we do have to take some responsibility but I would still say when did try to match them albeit on a few occasions we got penalised and they didn't

Players are taught to play the ref so when we did try to play quicker we weren't subject to the same rules and this is what makes Madley such a poor ref but like most of them they too arrogant to reflect and improve and not held to account

The keeper reacted as soon as Goutas headed the ball. This proves Grant was not obstructing his view of the header. Grant also didn't prevent the keeper from moving so wasn't impeding him.

The fact that Grant was stood offside was irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nobody's Rep

Totally agree on the 2nd part and we do have to take some responsibility but I would still say when did try to match them albeit on a few occasions we got penalised and they didn't

Players are taught to play the ref so when we did try to play quicker we weren't subject to the same rules and this is what makes Madley such a poor ref but like most of them they too arrogant to reflect and improve and not held to account

---

Yup, it's difficult for me to argue the point with you on that one. I'm not one for criticising referees, i believe in players taking responsibility wherever they can, but yesterday was difficult not to be critical of Madley. He did make things difficult, in fact he made the game as a whole difficult.

As I said during the game ...he WAS offside, and he was so close to the keeper that he HAD to be interfering with play.
As the late Brian Clough said, "if he's not interfering with play he shouldn't be on the field...."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PontBlue

The keeper reacted as soon as Goutas headed the ball. This proves Grant was not obstructing his view of the header. Grant also didn't prevent the keeper from moving so wasn't impeding him.

The fact that Grant was stood offside was irrelevant.

---

That’s the point, but it wasn’t relevant because the referee applied interpretations from decades ago that should not apply any more - forty and fifty years ago, yes, but you don’t see goals like that disallowed these days (or you shouldn’t do).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

That’s the point, but it wasn’t relevant because the referee applied interpretations from decades ago that should not apply any more - forty and fifty years ago, yes, but you don’t see goals like that disallowed these days (or you shouldn’t do).

---

Seconded. The fact players from both sides thought it was a clear goal points to Madeley, and only him, who decided it wasn't (and told the lino to put his flag up?). Hopefully won't get him ref'ing us again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maurice Swan

As I said during the game ...he WAS offside, and he was so close to the keeper that he HAD to be interfering with play.
As the late Brian Clough said, "if he's not interfering with play he shouldn't be on the field...."

---

He was clearly not interfering with play. Not my judgement but that of the only person who was in the best position to judge; the keeper! Neither he or any defender, including the one marking Grant made any appeal whatsoever which clearly shows there was no interference.

It was offside, but the fact the linesman didn't flag and the referee went looking for it doesn't sit well with me.

https://twitter.com/JustWorldies/sta...m8PCUOJ9g&s=19

how about this goal, should that have been disallowed for offside?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

https://twitter.com/JustWorldies/sta...m8PCUOJ9g&s=19

how about this goal, should that have been disallowed for offside?

---

I don't know. I don't think so. Obviously two players in an offside position. But they have zero impact on that goal. Do you want it to be offside?

I was in two minds about the offside decision. The bit that amazed me, was Grant trying to slam the ball into the net, in celebration, and blasted it over the bar from six inches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYCBlue

I don't know. I don't think so. Obviously two players in an offside position. But they have zero impact on that goal. Do you want it to be offside?

---

I agree, it’s a valid goal, but what impact did Grant have on yesterday’s disallowed goal?

Grant was offside, he was close to the keeper, it was from a set piece, Grant may have moved within the keepers eyeline or close too, a fraction before Goutas made contact. All of this in a crowded 6 yard box. Maybe Grant should have not been offside, then the ref wouldn't have a decision to make. This isn't as clear cut as some are making out in my opinion. For what it's worth, i think that the goal should have stood, The keeper wouldn't have stopped it (In my opinion) if Grant hadn't been there, it was a bullet of a header. But, Grants ball watching and lack of awareness gave the ref a decision to make. We came off 2nd best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maurice Swan

As I said during the game ...he WAS offside, and he was so close to the keeper that he HAD to be interfering with play.
As the late Brian Clough said, "if he's not interfering with play he shouldn't be on the field...."

---

Bloody hell Mo, Shanks would be fuming with you for not only getting the quote wrong but crediting Brian Clough with it :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYCBlue

It was offside, but the fact the linesman didn't flag and the referee went looking for it doesn't sit well with me.

---

Having just watched the highlights on Sky, the linesman had his flag up immediately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Des Parrot

Having just watched the highlights on Sky, the linesman had his flag up immediately.

---

I thought that but others have said that Madley told him to raise it, which i find odd, although i could only see Madley walking over to the lino.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

Bloody hell Mo, Shanks would be fuming with you for not only getting the quote wrong but crediting Brian Clough with it :hehe:

---

Whoever said it, isn’t the point that the quote is about half a century old - you know, the era that Madley’s decision came from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYCBlue

I don't know. I don't think so. Obviously two players in an offside position. But they have zero impact on that goal. Do you want it to be offside?

---

no it's clearly not offside as the 2 players have no impact on the goal, just like grant yesterday

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

I agree, it’s a valid goal, but what impact did Grant have on yesterday’s disallowed goal?

---

None. I'm with you on that. That goal was unstoppable.

The keeper wasn't stopping that even if Goutas is the only player in the box.
I'm pissed off with Madley because he gave the goal he was in the best position to see if Grant was interfering so even if the lino flags he could've spoke to him and said, the lino just flags the players position.
In the major feck up Madley did in the Coventry game last year he decided a city player was offside even though the ball came from an opposition player. He then told the lino to flag even though he wasn't offside and the ball came from an opposition player.
In short he hates us and is a cheating bastard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanD

Everyone at Ewood Park knew that was a valid goal that should have stood except, of course, that ref. Blackburn were resigned to kicking the ball up to the half way line to restart. But...just one example of an inept (biased?) refing performance. Quite literally incredible why our goal wasn't given. Meanwhile our poor performance continues, slipping back into a last season style of play that means scoring is a rarity. Largely as trying to get the round thing into the rectangular thing seems a vague concept for most of the time. Are we deliberately leaving a gap in the centre for KM to fill come January? Right now there seems to be some exclusion zone there. Plus, we only play with any urgency for the last 20 minutes.
Thanks for the write up Bob.

---

I am the most biased ever for watching Cardiff, but Grant was offside right in front of the keepers eyeliner, yes it's very harsh and I think it should have been a goal as 90% are given, but I can see why he disallowed if following the laws of the game.

Very disappointing, and he does seem to apply rules differently to us, he also booked Collins for asking for a card after a foul, which although they can, that was harsh too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Grant was offside, he was close to the keeper, it was from a set piece, Grant may have moved within the keepers eyeline or close too, a fraction before Goutas made contact. All of this in a crowded 6 yard box. Maybe Grant should have not been offside, then the ref wouldn't have a decision to make. This isn't as clear cut as some are making out in my opinion. For what it's worth, i think that the goal should have stood, The keeper wouldn't have stopped it (In my opinion) if Grant hadn't been there, it was a bullet of a header. But, Grants ball watching and lack of awareness gave the ref a decision to make. We came off 2nd best.

---

Hadn't read this before posting but spot on.

Grant also drew attention to himself, by blasting the ball back into the net still from an offside position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

Bloody hell Mo, Shanks would be fuming with you for not only getting the quote wrong but crediting Brian Clough with it :hehe:

---

From what I can make out, MS has got the Clough quote about right. Shankly's quote was 'if a player is not interfering with play or seeking to gain an advantage, then he should be'. Both are basically puerile gibberish (how's Alnwick meant to be interfering with play or gaining an advantage in Saturday's incident?) and, as TOBW says, come from a bygone age. They were gibberish back then too though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North Cardiff Blue

Hadn't read this before posting but spot on.

Grant also drew attention to himself, by blasting the ball back into the net still from an offside position.

---

He didn't

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robin Friday's Ghost

He didn't

---

Oh Yes, he drew attention to himself hitting it over the bar from an offside position :hehe:

Actually looking at it again, that's very harsh, we were robbed!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t09J8ogdO_M

Good movement for their goal, and an unbelievable tackle from NG saved a certain goal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North Cardiff Blue

Oh Yes, he drew attention to himself hitting it over the bar from an offside position :hehe:

Actually looking at it again, that's very harsh, we were robbed!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t09J8ogdO_M

Good movement for their goal, and an unbelievable tackle from NG saved a certain goal.

---

It was an idiotic decision. Firstly Grant wasn't interfering with the Goutas header. Secondly, if the argument is that he was in the keeper's line of sight of the corner kick, there was another Blackburn player in front of him who was doing the same.