+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Just watched the Huddersfield incident again on the club website - first contact is a good two yards outside the penalty area and then the player decides to fall down once he inside the box. Bennett may have been a bit cute in making sure there was contact with his opponent, but if that was a penalty, we should have had about fifteen of them for fouls on Morrison.
On holiday the other week and on two separate occasions blokes came up to me and brought the subject up about our misfortunes with refereeing decisions. One was a Sheffield Utd fan who was expecting the same treatment next season. It seems our woes hadn’t gone unnoticed by others. I was obviously recognised due to me sporting a Bluebird thong👍
Arsenal should have been down to 10 men for the diving by then.
We had 2 big appeals against Huddersfield as well - one which was well before any controversy.
Southampton one they should have had - Manga on Redmond. But hardly blatant !
Even you can’t argue against the fact we’ve had the shitty end of the stick.
The one v Brighton was arguable as well as many have said the ball was flicked on by a Brighton player.
( Personally I think maybe not, but even then not an easy one to pick - unlike the Watford, Everton and Burnley penalties)
as I've said before...if the gunnar foul on the chelsea centre back at chelseas first corner was given...the fouls on morrison and the offside goal wouldn't have happened.
and as for bambas offside goal being marginal..dream on..he was around the same distance offside as dave was for chelsea...have another look.
i have to say that morrison generally has bern grabbed a lot..and it's not as if it's a 50/50 thing as all morrison ever wants to do is head the ball.
The sedate about the Bamba one was whether the ball was flicked on by one of ours or one of theirs.
It was also pretty chaotic in there.
The Chelsea offside would have been obvious for the linesman had he not decided not to try to look around William.
Agree on the Gunnar one, but the same could be said of the Huddersfield penalty after we’d had one turned down
Strange game that, lashing down with rain, absolutely battered for 80 odd minutes then we score and they panicked, we get another and they were melting. Another five minutes and I’d have backed us to draw level. It was amazing how they switched off after being so much in control. Unfortunately for them they displayed that ten minutes of defending for ninety minutes yesterday.
I've recently had similar comments from Sheffield United, Sheffield Wednesday, Man United and West Ham fans (all accompanied by commiserations and sympathies about the Emiliano Sala tragedy). I think most pundits and opposition fans would agree that Cardiff (and Huddersfield) had the rough end of the stick with refereeing decisions last season. Got a few in our favour; got a lot against.
It certainly was one sided st Vicerage Road. Could and should have been 5/1 there
But they destroyed us at ours due to us having to go at them.
At 1-1 we still would have been in it.
Warnock said the penalty decision ripped the guts out of our players, who up until then had been doing OK.
No guarantee at all that they would have gone on to beat us from there.
Watford stuffed us twice and I'm 90% certain they would have done so even if we had been given that penalty and scored it. That non decision is a distraction in a thread like this in my view - surely it's the games where controversial refereeing decisions obviously cost us the points which would have kept us up which should take priority?
Cunningham at Everton, the multitude of poor decisions in the Chelsea game and the matches at Burnley (there's no way their second goal would have been scored in that manner if the score was 1-1 at the time) and Fulham are all examples of games which could have finished with a better result for us if official interpretations had been more favourable to us - we're talking six points there and, even if you take away the two wrongly gained against Brighton that would still leave us a couple of points above the relegation positions.
Yes, I appreciate this is over simplifying things, but none of the decisions in question would have been as blatantly wrong as Chelsea's equaliser was if they had been given in our favour.
It's relevant as well that fans from other clubs seem to agree that we had a rougher time of it at the hands of the officials than most and, to be honest, I don't get the arguments from some on here (like, for example, the one about none of the incidents which went against us in the Chelsea game would have occurred if Gunnar had been penalised at the first corner) that anyone who is pointing out something which, to me, seems perfectly obvious is being one eyed.
what conclusion?