The Ref Stop

Peterborough - Ghost Corner

The Ref Stop
Ouch. Had it happen tbh. Wrong angle, player reactions… brainfart.
 
Last edited:
There is one small consideration here. Unless the corner taker is Harry Houdini, how did it the ball end up in the goal?
 
It was seemingly suggested at the time on local commentary that there was a hole in the net. Very odd one, as the attackers don't really think they have scored, defenders don't seem to have realised they have conceded, everyone seems surprised that the ball is in the goal
 
I mean it's clearly a goal. Player reaction tells you it's clearly a goal. All round incredibly poor from the officials
 
I was surprised the players didn't push & pull the side netting of the goal to prove there was a hole or not to convince the referee it was a goal or not a goal.
 
I mean to be fair I watched this about 6 times and still couldn't see how on earth it ended up in the net. The photo posted by @bester above shows it's pretty clear mind.
You would think with ball in the back of the net it's pretty hard to see how it got there without going in mind! Then again, that's easy to say from my position and not under the pressure of the match.
 
Can only assume.the ar and ref have never heard of Occam's Razor

It's an interesting one from a psychology perspective
The MO's have believed in what (they think) they've seen (and the muted reaction of players) at the expense of incontrovertible evidence
I do have some sympathy for them.
This must be 'replay territory'.... no?
 
Last edited:
Big Cat said:
Can only assume.the ar and ref have never heard of Occam's Razor

It's an interesting one from a psychology perspective
The MO's have believed in what (they think) they've seen (and the muted reaction of players) at the expense of incontrovertible evidence
I do have some sympathy for them.
This must be 'replay territory'.... no?
Click to expand...

they won regardless so won't be any need happily

even so i don't think it would fall into any category permitting it? it's just a really bad refs decision no?
 
es1 said:
they won regardless so won't be any need happily

even so i don't think it would fall into any category permitting it? it's just a really bad refs decision no?
Click to expand...
I'd have expected a replay on account of the goal being a fact. That would seem apt.
I don't know however. Luckily they won anyway, so no need
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
Big Cat said:
I'd have expected a replay on account of the goal being a fact. That would seem apt.
I don't know however. Luckily they won anyway, so no need
Click to expand...
I don't think winning means anything when it comes to replay.
I recall the game where a player was sin binned in FA cup. The player was sin binned from the team that won, reported by the team that won, and the game was still replayed.
 
There's precedence for this when Stuart Attwell and Nigel Bannister gave a goal for Reading against Watford that very clearly hadn't gone into the goal. That was far more obvious, but the game wasn't replayed.

Suspect the reason is it doesn't match the incorrect in law criteria that would justify a replay. Here they thought they saw some and applied the laws based on that, it is what they thought they saw that was wrong. Incorrect in law would be seeing what happened clearly and then applying the laws incorrectly.
 
RustyRef said:
There's precedence for this when Stuart Attwell and Nigel Bannister gave a goal for Reading against Watford that very clearly hadn't gone into the goal. That was far more obvious, but the game wasn't replayed.

Suspect the reason is it doesn't match the incorrect in law criteria that would justify a replay. Here they thought they saw some and applied the laws based on that, it is what they thought they saw that was wrong. Incorrect in law would be seeing what happened clearly and then applying the laws incorrectly.
Click to expand...
True, though the offended team winning must have also had a bearing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top