RevidgeBlue

Davis was a lot closer than that by the time Moreshita got the ball under some semblance of control but on balance the referee still got it wrong Id say.

It's only a red if you deny an obvious goalscoring opportunity. It's not a red if the covering defenders can get round. Think he got that one wrong although the block on Ohashi wasn't a pen. Good half from us but we never really tested their keeper. Can't see Ipswich being as bad second half, it has the feel of a 0-1 smash and grab away victory. We need to maintain the same tempo second half. Ipswich havent been able to live with it.

The ref was well behind play as the ball was wellied forward. Must have thought the other defender could get round to cover. Not sure he would have.

Ignore him, he's obviously on a wind up - see his comments re the ref and Miller.

Alebiosu's delivery and decision making in the final 3rd uncharacteristically poor tonight

Lol whatever.

35 mins in and for all our pressure, their keeper has had virtually nothing to do.

Terrible free kick.

It's Exiled.

Ipswich look well sluggish as if they've been on the coach all day. There for the taking IF we can keep this sort of tempo up.

How on earth was that not a yellow for Miller? Crikey.

Gudjohnssen should have done better there before. His all round game is terrible as well. We've started off in far more positive fashion than we usually do at home though.

Just thinking that. Did their Club do free travel for them?

I was wondering who the guy who looked about 55 was. New member of Coaching staff? Then I realised it was Forshaw.

We know!

Did Barton ever play for England?

At this point it's hard to escape the conclusion that they're deliberately making one or two "offers" they know won't work so that Suhail can tell the FF that "We've tried doing X, Y and Z and it didn't work". Then they can try charging the same numbers of fans (or less) and even higher amount than currently to hit their target.

(Imo) The fact that it was apparently a majority decision but a large number of the panel abstained. On the other hand: a) We should have maintained our drainage facilities properly over the years and/or taken additional measures for this particular fixture given the forecast b) We could (should?) have appealed but chose not to c) There's nothing stopping us going out and winning the game again. Karma's a bitch sometimes but if we lose tonight that should be the end of it, and I hope we don't hear any whining about it from anyone at the Club going forward or heaven forbid if the worst comes to the worst.

Really surprised the Club didn't appeal the original decision. Especially given a large proportion of the panel abstained due to an alleged conflict of interest. We seem to love pursuing a lost cause normally but when we had (two) genuine grievances, we didn't.

Hope to god we win tonight to remove any possible controversy, we'll never hear the end of it from Ismael and Club apologists if we lose and end up going down by less than 3 points. His get out of jail free card for the rest of the season gift wrapped to him in a bow potentially.

Several posters on here thought it was a yellow and one didnt even think it was worthy of a card.

Quite possibly. 🙂 Having taken a bit more notice of what they actually said in detail they sort of contradicted themselves a bit. They said the referee saw it close up and made his decision and that the challenge wasn't as bad in real time as it looked in slow motion but that once called over to the monitor to look at the freeze frame a ref is realistically only going to award a red. It was the presenter who made the point that Taylor awarded a yellow, so was that "a clear and obvious" error and maybe VAR shouldnt have intervened.

Caicedo challenge - Normal attempt to win the ball, no brutality or excessive force from either player, two genuine attempts to win the ball, one just got there fractionally before the other. - Any tackle presents a risk of serious injury to the opponent if you get it wrong. - In this case studs down not up. His foot has to go somewhere. It doesn't matter because your mind is made up as well but that's part of my point it's a very contentious and subjective decision. The referee on the spot made (imo) the correct decision on the field having witnessed it close up at normal speed and VAR shouldnt have intervened. Of course it's going to look horrendous in slow motion and winding a freeze frame back and forward.

Throw ins maybe but it ought to be possible to make a fairly snap decision. Corners there's a natural break in play anyway and the wrong decision either way could prove absolutely crucial. Off sides - if they can determine if someone has a toe nail off - why on earth wouldnt the technology be able to detect "daylight"? Wouldn't be subjective at all.

100%. Id scrap VAR but given we're probably stuck with it permanently, the only way it becomes tolerable overall for me is if the offside law is amended to require clear daylight. Other tweaks I'd make are as alluded to above, they should be able to intervene where a second yellow is clearly wrongly given/not given or if a corner or throw in is clearly wrongly given/not given as the latter are factual in the same way as whether the ball is over the line or not.