For those who can’t see the double touch..

DCI_Gene_Hunt

Well-known member
From that Sky Sports clip whilst watching on my laptop I can't see a two touches. Perhaps on a higher definition screen it would be more visible.

I've not seen it from behind so can't comment on that.

It's noticeable that the referee decides straight away so he clearly is sure and also a Norwich player appeals straight away.

Can I just say that at the age of 58 whilst wearing glasses my eyesight is 20/20.
 

Chris_Boro

Well-known member
All pretty irrelevant really as the first offence of that penalty is Krul being off his line when contact is made with the ball.

Linesman should be calling that as its not even close, unlike the debate over the double touch.
 

Heam44

Active member
Howson even looks towards the red straight away cos he sees it. Tav barely celebrates.

I watched the highlights and post match analysis on quest, after watching the post match analysis it’s impossible not to see it.

The post match analysis includes the following comments:

“It’s a double touch, we’re the first to criticise referees but it’s an excellent decision”.

“It’s rightly disallowed”

“He’s some eyes on him to see it, we had to slow it right down”.
 

HolgateCorner

Well-known member
If you watch that you will see it! 100%
Ok I will see if I can find it on catch up.

Still think the ref guessed though, far too fast at normal speed for anyone to be sure.

99 times out of 100 that penalty would have stood and nobody from Norwich would have complained.

The ref wasn’t so shxt hot that he failed to see the second yellow ( he lied about that to Warnock in my opinion) and on the Norwich forum there is one of their posters saying that their player deliberately put his foot in place so Coulson had to foul him.

So three marginal decisions against us and nothing for us, what does that say about the ref?
 

Block21

Well-known member
Ok I will see if I can find it on catch up.

Still think the ref guessed though, far too fast at normal speed for anyone to be sure.

99 times out of 100 that penalty would have stood and nobody from Norwich would have complained.

The ref wasn’t so shxt hot that he failed to see the second yellow ( he lied about that to Warnock in my opinion) and on the Norwich forum there is one of their posters saying that their player deliberately put his foot in place so Coulson had to foul him.

So three marginal decisions against us and nothing for us, what does that say about the ref?

I think the ref got all the decisions correct apart from the Folarin one. But what I will say is the referee has never liked the boro. And I know that for a fact.
 

chickenrunner

Well-known member
........................ But what I will say is the referee has never liked the boro. And I know that for a fact.
Qualification of that statement is required. (Lack of an emoji makes it impossible for me to decide if you're mucking about. That and the FACT that fact isn't in caps) :)
 

Block21

Well-known member
Qualification of that statement is required. (Lack of an emoji makes it impossible for me to decide if you're mucking about. That and the FACT that fact isn't in caps) :)

He used to be my PE teacher at Blakeston for 5 years. And my football school team manager. He is a decent bloke and was a good teacher but he is the biggest Hartlepool fan going and he absolutely hated Boro and wound all us students up about Boro every day. He really didn’t like us. Like I say though. Only decision I think he got badly wrong was the Folarin one. Was about 10 years since I seen him and it’s good to see him refereeing championship matches just wish he didn’t ref our games.
 

HolgateCorner

Well-known member
I think the ref got all the decisions correct apart from the Folarin one. But what I will say is the referee has never liked the boro. And I know that for a fact.
I think he had a hidden agenda with the Tav penalty, I can only speculate as to what it was but he saw the opportunity to disallow the goal because Tav had slipped and he very quickly grabbed it with both hands.

I thought Coulson got done over by a cute player in no mans land moving towards the corner flag but hopefully he will learn his lesson.

The Folarin decision was quite simply a joke for a referee operating at this level.
 

Oooo

Well-known member
I cant see a second touch but given so many people can and NW did not complain I now think it must have happened. Still annoying that I cannot see it.
 

B-Man

Member
100% a double touch. The idea the ref was desperate to disallow is laughable really. And their penalty was a result of some pathetic defending from Coulsen, absolutely no need to dangle your leg out like that
 

HolgateCorner

Well-known member
100% a double touch. The idea the ref was desperate to disallow is laughable really. And their penalty was a result of some pathetic defending from Coulsen, absolutely no need to dangle your leg out like that
100% a double touch. The idea the ref was desperate to disallow is laughable really. And their penalty was a result of some pathetic defending from Coulsen, absolutely no need to dangle your leg out like that
I suppose you were happy with Krol off his line? The defender encroaching? Their player not getting a second yellow for a professional foul?
You can’t have it all ways you know.
 
for those of you advocating the double touch, can you tell us where and how it occurs
because i just cannot see it. Block i usually agree with most things you say but cannot understand your so adamant on this. Heam im not too sure hes not a geordie troll .
Its clear from behind that he strikes the ball with his left foot as hes slipping, but his right foot slides under his left foot after hes struck it and makes no contact on the ball.
Im p****d that the referee makes that decision, Krull made no reaction until he saw the ref make his decision,.
Tav was dumbfounded hed slipped and did protest as did others but play carried on quickly so they had to get back into the game. The law is there to stop a player dribbling forward. He gained no advantage. As others have pointed out if the referee is applying the rules then equally retake as Krull off his line and also an infringement in the box.
All in all we can discuss it till the cows come home it will make no difference now. But it is an awful decision and smacks of nepotism. ( he also should have booked Sorenson for the blatant body check and then followed with a red ) that was even more blatant nepotism
 
Top
X