Dissapointed- The goal that Never was.

[Chaney]

Watching the daily mirror with interest this week..our good mate Ollie Holt is sure to have a go at us..especially after Shunts comments in the papers today

[Pool and Darts]

I think in light of recent events we need to really consider the future of football as a whole.

After thinking it through, and seeing everyone's comments on the lastest issue, as well as a previous thread regarding video technology, I have come up with the answer:

To ensure there is no possibility of human error spoiling our game, (I can't believe it is still allowed to happen in this day and age), we have to take steps to ensure the 'right' result every single time.

To this end, all humans will be removed from football in the future. Every match will be carried out using a simple mathematical model, with results calculated by computer. These results would be reached by simply inputting the quality of the 'players' on each side, possibly by rating them numerically in a series of attributes, so that both 'teams' could be compared by the 'program' and a result obtained for each 'match'. The results of each could then be compared in a 'league table', and we can just hand the trophy to the 'team' with the most 'points' at the end of the season.

This would be hugely beneficial for the profile of the game as well, as to ensure that every fan can get to see each game, we could make many copies of this 'program' and distribute a copy to every household in which a fan resides. That way, they can play the 'matches' at a time to suit them, thus never missing a game.

That way we will never have anything like this outrage again. We are saved!!!!!

[Franchise FC]

1. Why would the referee have given a goal kick in the first place when it was going to be a corner ?
2. Why did the assistant referee think NHunt was trying to clear the ball off the line at that end ?
3. Why do birds suddenly appear...............no, that's not right.
4. Why, oh why, oh why didn't the referee and assistant referee confer with a conversation that went something like this :

Ref : Did the ball cross the line ?
Asst Ref : Yes
Ref : You see those white wooden things ?
Asst Ref : Yes
Ref : Did it go in between them ?
Asst Ref : Why, couldn't you see which direction it went from where you were ? All I'm supposed to look at is the line.
Ref : Bugger that, I've got this as an away win on the fixed odds.

[Franchise FC]

I think in light of recent events we need to really consider the future of football as a whole.

After thinking it through, and seeing everyone's comments on the lastest issue, as well as a previous thread regarding video technology, I have come up with the answer:

To ensure there is no possibility of human error spoiling our game, (I can't believe it is still allowed to happen in this day and age), we have to take steps to ensure the 'right' result every single time.

To this end, all humans will be removed from football in the future. Every match will be carried out using a simple mathematical model, with results calculated by computer. These results would be reached by simply inputting the quality of the 'players' on each side, possibly by rating them numerically in a series of attributes, so that both 'teams' could be compared by the 'program' and a result obtained for each 'match'. The results of each could then be compared in a 'league table', and we can just hand the trophy to the 'team' with the most 'points' at the end of the season.

This would be hugely beneficial for the profile of the game as well, as to ensure that every fan can get to see each game, we could make many copies of this 'program' and distribute a copy to every household in which a fan resides. That way, they can play the 'matches' at a time to suit them, thus never missing a game.

That way we will never have anything like this outrage again. We are saved!!!!!

Absolutely priceless - except that, surely, it's Wii are saved.

[Pool and Darts]

Absolutely priceless - except that, surely, it's Wii are saved.

Depends how PC you want to be?!?!?

[Geekins]

Number 3 - Good point!

[Rex]

Is number 3 a Carpenters song. It all makes sense now.....

[Geekins]

I thought it was Paul Daniels and Debbie

[watfordroyal]

I don't know what all the fuss is about...
the ball was definitely grounded over the line, a perfectly good try to me!
Can't understand why we only got one point for it though

[Archie's penalty]

Let's see,

Stoke defenders all realise that Torres wan't offside at all, so the next time Liverpool attack Stoke defenders all stand aside and allow them to score. Likely? No.

Everton players are sure that the ball did not cross the line when it bounced down and so allow Hull a goal to compensate. Likely? No.

Any player anywhere is tripped and a penalty was the right decision, but the referee doesn't award it. Next attack the defence stands aside and allows a goal in compensation for the penalty. Likely? You are getting the picture.

Or, how about the referee gets in the way of a clearance and deflects it straight into the path of a striker who has a simple shot on goal and scores. Does his team (let's call them Norwich) compensate by allowing Reading a goal? No, and nor should they.

It was massively poor refereeing, but the result stands and it was not up to Reading to deal with it.

Good post. I agree with Floyd

I would rather just have the point and move on.

Fwiw the game was improved by the decision immensely. If it was replayed it would be 0-0 or we would lose 1-0!

Football is full of dodgy decisions. I really hope the game is not replayed - it would set a dangerous precedent...

[RG30]

Apologies if it's been done before but I moved yesterday so haven't had a chance to see the goal again. Does somebody have a link for it on Youtube?

[kwik-silva]

Apologies if it's been done before but I moved yesterday so haven't had a chance to see the goal again. Does somebody have a link for it on Youtube?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLTz2U9RfmM

Murts was talking about it on BBC 5 Live earlier

[royalsteve]

it amazes me what short memories some footy fans have.....some of their fans think deserved to win...well their first shot on goal was in 1st half injury time!

they are also forgetting one important factor....Reading had a perfectly good goal disallowed!

[Cpl Jones Dont panic]

Why o Why O why

Why did it have to be Watford with nice guy Bothroyd, imagine it happened a few weeks ago against Palace. The joy of Warnock , woud have been priceless. It could have been the first manager to self implode into a zillion pieces.

[Thaumagurist*]

I've just spent 15 minutes reading this thread. All I can say is:

Oh









My









God












Are










Those








People








claiming







to










be









embarrassed












about






our




players'














attitude










for









real?

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

I've just spent 15 minutes reading this thread. All I can say is:

Oh My God. Are Those People claiming to be embarrassed about our players' attitude for real?

If our first goal had come from a penalty that was a blatant dive that was obvious to everyone except the ref, would any of them saying be should replay the game, or have let Watford score an equaliser?


It was a shocking decision, but in my book taking advantage of that good fortune is more acceptable than outright cheating, yet you'll never hear calls for a game to be replayed for goals resulting from cheating. Our 3-3 draw with Darlington in the league cup, with Peter Mate's handball equaliser was more embarrassing if you ask me, but nobody said that game should have been replayed, even though it cost Darlington the win, and the money from a match at Anfield.

[Thaumagurist*]

It's the ref and the linesman, not our team, that should be copping the flak.

[Archie's penalty]

It's now being talked about on the monday night football show on fivelive

[Rex]

God it's like Reading have committed a own goal there I've got prats at work coming up to me talking about it. Get over it. It's happened. Clubs should never have to pay out for additional costs of police support, ambulance support....it's all been discussed to death now.

[earleyroyal]

Whether this damages our club's standing or not, I couldn't give a flying fcuk. There is a large group of football fans who are, how can I put it...confused? who think that Reading had an obligation to disagree with the officials at the time and let Watford walk it in, but wouldn't dream of, say, missing a penalty if their team hadn't deserved to win it (no contradiction in that is there ), and another group who realise that this is totally the officials' fault and not Reading's at all.

If a bunch of keyboard warriors (check out some of the stinkers on the 606 discussion thread, started by a man who thinks Reading should be deducted two points and the game replayed ) think that it's Reading fault, then let them. Any sensible fan knows that, at the time, the Reading players were in no position to decide to let Watford walk through and score. Maybe things were different at half-time, but having thought about it I now think Reading would've had no good reason to let Watford score after half-time - the course of the game was changed by the goal. It was a bad decision, Reading benefited from it. No team would ever let Watford score because the officials cocked up. What next, if Hunt runs out for a throw then crosses for a goal do we let them score?