Opposition fans back from the game - 24/25 page 225 onwards

[Snowflake Royal]

I wonder if it wasn't given because the ref deemed that May had fouled Mbengue when he leant on him making him miskick the ball. Therefore he played advantage because the ball went back to Pereira.

I don't remember seeing what the ref signalled when the incident happened.

The whole problem is the ref didn't signal anything. It's either a foul by May on Mbengue and a freekick to us, or you signal to play an advantage. OR it's a blatant backpass that Pereira rather stupidly fell on, instead of booting it safely out of play, which he had time to do.

The ref bottled the decision and did nothing, which just made things worse.

In my original suggestion I said that I didn't see if the ref signalled anything. However, he must have signalled something to Pereira otherwise he wouldn't have picked the ball up.

Pereira has been known to do the odd daft thing, and I doubt he'd have had time to look at the ref before deciding what to do. I think it was just, safest way to guarantee May can't score is dive on it.

But you maybe right. Think Ref was out of picture on the original footage and replay.

[Horsham Royal]

What do the oppposition fans back from the game think?

[Snowflake Royal]

What do the oppposition fans back from the game think?

Page 225.

Generally sane and fairly complimentary. Which is always a bit disappointing. Let's be honest we like reading the mad delusional ones best.

[Crusader Royal]

I think Crusader had a few two many bevvies at lunch today.

I merely suggested that the ref might have seen a foul on Mbengue and let it go as the ball went back to Pereira. If that is the case, and I am only suggesting it was, then whether Mbengue intentionally passed it back is irrelevant.

It's hardly a suggestion worthy of an argument, but hey ho......

And I merely pointed out that ignoring an offence on the pretence of ‘playing advantage’ isn’t a genuine option….

It’s not an argument, it’s someone else suggesting something !

[AthleticoSpizz]

….don’t we have enough of our own here?

[Whore Jackie]

In my original suggestion I said that I didn't see if the ref signalled anything. However, he must have signalled something to Pereira otherwise he wouldn't have picked the ball up.

Watching it, if felt more like that having picked up the 'backpass', Pereira by immediately signalling to the ref that it wasn't a backpass, made up the refs mind to go for the easiest option, ie play on.

[Wycombe Royal]

And I merely pointed out that ignoring an offence on the pretence of ‘playing advantage’ isn’t a genuine option…

Isn't that what playing advantage is? You let an offence go as the team who were "offended" against keep the ball in a similar or better position.....

My god this is tedious....

I think there's a paper bag over there.....I think it's looking for an argument.....off you toddle.....

[Crusader Royal]

And I merely pointed out that ignoring an offence on the pretence of ‘playing advantage’ isn’t a genuine option…

Isn't that what playing advantage is? You let an offence go as the team who were "offended" against keep the ball in a similar or better position.....

My god this is tedious....

I think there's a paper bag over there.....I think it's looking for an argument.....off you toddle.....

Ok, you don’t understand advantage.

You should have said earlier…..

The bizarre idea that on a discussion forum you aren’t allowed to discuss stuff really takes some getting your head round…

[Snowflake Royal]

Are you still being obnoxious about this?

[Sutekh]

And I merely pointed out that ignoring an offence on the pretence of ‘playing advantage’ isn’t a genuine option…

Isn't that what playing advantage is? You let an offence go as the team who were "offended" against keep the ball in a similar or better position.....

My god this is tedious....

I think there's a paper bag over there.....I think it's looking for an argument.....off you toddle.....

Ok, you don’t understand advantage.

You should have said earlier…..

The bizarre idea that on a discussion forum you aren’t allowed to discuss stuff really takes some getting your head round…

OK, discuss then, what is advantage if it's not the ref signalling to play on after an offence against the, usually, attacking side? Seem to recall many occasions where the ref signals to play on and the game continues only for the said ref to take action against the perpetrator of "the offence" (a 1971 film with Sean Connery filmed in Bracknell by the way) at the next break in play.

[Crusader Royal]

Isn't that what playing advantage is? You let an offence go as the team who were "offended" against keep the ball in a similar or better position.....

My god this is tedious....

I think there's a paper bag over there.....I think it's looking for an argument.....off you toddle.....

Ok, you don’t understand advantage.

You should have said earlier…..

The bizarre idea that on a discussion forum you aren’t allowed to discuss stuff really takes some getting your head round…

OK, discuss then, what is advantage if it's not the ref signalling to play on after an offence against the, usually, attacking side? Seem to recall many occasions where the ref signals to play on and the game continues only for the said ref to take action against the perpetrator of "the offence" (a 1971 film with Sean Connery filmed in Bracknell by the way) at the next break in play.

That all seems reasonable (no idea about the film).
If the ref plays advantage and then the ‘victim’ offends advantage isn’t saying ‘two wrongs make a right’ and letting them cancel each other out.
You need to go back to the original offence and penalise it as no advantage accrued.
In this situation the ref might have ended up in a reasonable place (us, the victim of the original foul) with the ball.
But if we only had the ball because we committed another offence then that is not correct.
I’ve re read that to ensure that as in all my previous posts I’ve not said anything nasty, offensive or obnoxious but I but Ian still decides to wade in…..

[Sutekh]

Ok, you don’t understand advantage.

You should have said earlier…..

The bizarre idea that on a discussion forum you aren’t allowed to discuss stuff really takes some getting your head round…

OK, discuss then, what is advantage if it's not the ref signalling to play on after an offence against the, usually, attacking side? Seem to recall many occasions where the ref signals to play on and the game continues only for the said ref to take action against the perpetrator of "the offence" (a 1971 film with Sean Connery filmed in Bracknell by the way) at the next break in play.

That all seems reasonable (no idea about the film).
If the ref plays advantage and then the ‘victim’ offends advantage isn’t saying ‘two wrongs make a right’ and letting them cancel each other out.
You need to go back to the original offence and penalise it as no advantage accrued.
In this situation the ref might have ended up in a reasonable place (us, the victim of the original foul) with the ball.
But if we only had the ball because we committed another offence then that is not correct.
I’ve re read that to ensure that as in all my previous posts I’ve not said anything nasty, offensive or obnoxious but I but Ian still decides to wade in…..

You're talking of there being a second offence after an advantage has been played. Not sure I've ever seen a ref play 2 or more advantages in the same passage of play and therefore have" 2 wrongs making a right".

Advantage is when the ref chooses to "ignore" an offence as the team offended against has a promising situation developing. Once that situation has developed and there is a break in the game the ref will sometimes (not always) take action against the offender. There are also occasions where if the "promising situation" breaks down fairly quickly the ref will penalise that original offence and call play back.

[Wycombe Royal]

OK, discuss then, what is advantage if it's not the ref signalling to play on after an offence against the, usually, attacking side? Seem to recall many occasions where the ref signals to play on and the game continues only for the said ref to take action against the perpetrator of "the offence" (a 1971 film with Sean Connery filmed in Bracknell by the way) at the next break in play.

That all seems reasonable (no idea about the film).
If the ref plays advantage and then the ‘victim’ offends advantage isn’t saying ‘two wrongs make a right’ and letting them cancel each other out.
You need to go back to the original offence and penalise it as no advantage accrued.
In this situation the ref might have ended up in a reasonable place (us, the victim of the original foul) with the ball.
But if we only had the ball because we committed another offence then that is not correct.
I’ve re read that to ensure that as in all my previous posts I’ve not said anything nasty, offensive or obnoxious but I but Ian still decides to wade in…..

You're talking of there being a second offence after an advantage has been played. Not sure I've ever seen a ref play 2 or more advantages in the same passage of play and therefore have" 2 wrongs making a right".

Advantage is when the ref chooses to "ignore" an offence as the team offended against has a promising situation developing. Once that situation has developed and there is a break in the game the ref will sometimes (not always) take action against the offender. There are also occasions where if the "promising situation" breaks down fairly quickly the ref will penalise that original offence and call play back.

And they may also let an offence go if it was minor and the team offended against retain position in a no worse situation, basically letting the game flow. All of that is within the referees discretion and that is what I am saying might have happened in the May/Mbengue situation.

Crusader Royal would be one of those referees who blows for every little infringement, making himself the centre of attention and annoying players, coaching staff and fans of both sides.

[Crusader Royal]

That all seems reasonable (no idea about the film).
If the ref plays advantage and then the ‘victim’ offends advantage isn’t saying ‘two wrongs make a right’ and letting them cancel each other out.
You need to go back to the original offence and penalise it as no advantage accrued.
In this situation the ref might have ended up in a reasonable place (us, the victim of the original foul) with the ball.
But if we only had the ball because we committed another offence then that is not correct.
I’ve re read that to ensure that as in all my previous posts I’ve not said anything nasty, offensive or obnoxious but I but Ian still decides to wade in…..

You're talking of there being a second offence after an advantage has been played. Not sure I've ever seen a ref play 2 or more advantages in the same passage of play and therefore have" 2 wrongs making a right".

Advantage is when the ref chooses to "ignore" an offence as the team offended against has a promising situation developing. Once that situation has developed and there is a break in the game the ref will sometimes (not always) take action against the offender. There are also occasions where if the "promising situation" breaks down fairly quickly the ref will penalise that original offence and call play back.

And they may also let an offence go if it was minor and the team offended against retain position in a no worse situation, basically letting the game flow. All of that is within the referees discretion and that is what I am saying might have happened in the May/Mbengue situation.

Crusader Royal would be one of those referees who blows for every little infringement, making himself the centre of attention and annoying players, coaching staff and fans of both sides.

I wasn’t as it happens, and still aren’t !
Talking about the ins and outs of a specific incident really doesn’t impact wider views.
I’m surprised you still don’t get the bit about advantage being lost if you then commit an offence but I guess we’re going down different lines of thought here.
It’s probably worth moving on.

[Crusader Royal]

OK, discuss then, what is advantage if it's not the ref signalling to play on after an offence against the, usually, attacking side? Seem to recall many occasions where the ref signals to play on and the game continues only for the said ref to take action against the perpetrator of "the offence" (a 1971 film with Sean Connery filmed in Bracknell by the way) at the next break in play.

That all seems reasonable (no idea about the film).
If the ref plays advantage and then the ‘victim’ offends advantage isn’t saying ‘two wrongs make a right’ and letting them cancel each other out.
You need to go back to the original offence and penalise it as no advantage accrued.
In this situation the ref might have ended up in a reasonable place (us, the victim of the original foul) with the ball.
But if we only had the ball because we committed another offence then that is not correct.
I’ve re read that to ensure that as in all my previous posts I’ve not said anything nasty, offensive or obnoxious but I but Ian still decides to wade in…..

You're talking of there being a second offence after an advantage has been played. Not sure I've ever seen a ref play 2 or more advantages in the same passage of play and therefore have" 2 wrongs making a right".

Advantage is when the ref chooses to "ignore" an offence as the team offended against has a promising situation developing. Once that situation has developed and there is a break in the game the ref will sometimes (not always) take action against the offender. There are also occasions where if the "promising situation" breaks down fairly quickly the ref will penalise that original offence and call play back.

We are making the same point…..

[On Strings]

Some positive praise from Wigan fans on X, regarding them being played off the park by bargain basement free agents and academy grads.

Thought Wigan's fans were very disappointing today. Hardly heard them. C1871 on the other hand were prenominal in the first half. A lot quieter second half, but great credit to them. That fan initiative has been such a big positive for the club!

[Snowflake Royal]

That Hugill chap will get a few goals on the break this season. Rarely see anyone beat Mbengue in a foot race, and he knows how to play on the shoulder.

[RoyalBlue]

That Hugill chap will get a few goals on the break this season. Rarely see anyone beat Mbengue in a foot race, and he knows how to play on the shoulder.

But he didn't beat him very often from what I can recall.

[Hound]

That Hugill chap will get a few goals on the break this season. Rarely see anyone beat Mbengue in a foot race, and he knows how to play on the shoulder.

But he didn't beat him very often from what I can recall.

Yes he looked ok. Beat Mbengue for that first half shot if I recall. Probably their best player.

[Royal_jimmy]

Some complimentary comments on Twitter too