Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I posted this on the match thread:

 

Absolutely ridiculous decision. I said earlier that Mané was aiming for the other side of the goal but there's no way that was an own goal. His shot was on target and it deflected off the defender's attempted block. Somebody needs to teach these idiots how football works. Does this now mean that every time a shot gets a nick off a defender it's going to be classed as an own goal? Pillocks.

Posted

So three own goals, a giveaway from their keeper, should've been a penalty that would obviously have changed the game and Sunderland would have gone on to win comfortably.

 

Ok.

 

Happy for the press and the rest of the world to believe that. The longer we stay under the radar the better.

Posted

The Dubious Goals panel must be based in a retirement home for decrepit old referees................... that is barking mad.

 

Obviously the beginning of the lets put Southampton back in their place campaign, by the Football Hierarchy.

Posted
  Mr X said:
ive paused it several times and still cant see why its not a valid goal for mane
This.

 

You have got to be kidding me? This is a joke, right? The Sunderland defender didn't even touch it. Are my eyes deceiving me?

Posted

This goal wasn't even dubious at the time, nor was it in dispute as to who the goal scorer was. I thought those were the criteria that any goal needed to meet before it was put under these experts noses?

 

Why have they wasted their time to look at this, i assume, over and over and over again to make an own goal out of it?

 

Obviously no one has it in for us, but things like this sometimes make you wonder.....

Posted
  SaintTex said:
This.

 

You have got to be kidding me? This is a joke, right? The Sunderland defender didn't even touch it. Are my eyes deceiving me?

OK, I just saw the first re-play after the goal (the camera angle from behind the net), and I will concede it does look like the Sunderland defender poked it in.

 

but still, come on.

Posted
  S-Clarke said:
This goal wasn't even dubious at the time, nor was it in dispute as to who the goal scorer was. I thought those were the criteria that any goal needed to meet before it was put under these experts noses?

 

Why have they wasted their time to look at this, i assume, over and over and over again to make an own goal out of it?

 

Obviously no one has it in for us, but things like this sometimes make you wonder.....

 

I wonder if they realise it was the Pelle / OG that was the one needing a review?

 

I'm guessing that there is no form of appeal available? Why was it even reviewed in the 1st place - I didn't see one hint in the numerous newspaper reports (and I ploughed through just about everyone of them!!)that it wasn't Mane's goal. Would love to hear the defenders opinion of what happened.

Posted
  ericofarabia said:
I wonder if they realise it was the Pelle / OG that was the one needing a review?

 

I'm guessing that there is no form of appeal available? Why was it even reviewed in the 1st place - I didn't see one hint in the numerous newspaper reports (and I ploughed through just about everyone of them!!)that it wasn't Mane's goal. Would love to hear the defenders opinion of what happened.

 

It's clear as daylight that Mane is aiming for the right of the goal and the ball deflects in off Van Aanholt's outstretched foot. His shot is on target so what's the problem? They can't seriously think that Van Aanholt's gets there ahead of Sadio, can they?

Posted

JOKE! I cant stand own goals. Obviously is if the a player kicks it in then fine, but a striker kicking the ball at the gaol (on target or not) he forces the error. If a defender sticks out a leg to try to stop the shot should he be to blame just casue it deflects in? Crazy. ALSO .... the FA and FIFA etc use video evidence to award own goals and cr@p like that but dont use it to fine players for diving or assults. Football needs a good look at itself sometimes.

Posted
  Bearsy said:
I lol'd at the picture of Mane trying to do a "thumbs up". I dunno if that was the joke tho!

 

B0pJewkIIAAj9uj.jpg

 

Yeah not sure if the Mirror is laughing at Saints, or if Saints are laughing at Premier league, or if everyone is laughing at Mane?

Posted
  Mr X said:
ive paused it several times and still cant see why its not a valid goal for mane

 

For it to be classed as an own goal the ball must have been initially going wide OR its forward momentum towards the goal must have been stopped. I've never yet seen an OG classed as such if the ball is on target.

 

So they have to have decided that Mane's original contact was going wide (to the other side of the goal), and having watched it about 10 times on slow-mo from various angles, there is absolutely no way they can tell where Mane's shot was going without using some kind of super-slow-mo video technology.

 

But the main point is that I don't think anyone in the ground (including Mane and Van Aanholt) even considered that it was actually an own goal. So why even bother judging on it? It's not like the defender WANTS the OG.

 

It's even crapper than taking Dodd's Skate corner off him and giving it to Pasanen who headed it off the bar into the net from the post, or Egil's hat-trick against Man U.

Posted
  Jonnyboy said:
Yeah not sure if the Mirror is laughing at Saints, or if Saints are laughing at Premier league, or if everyone is laughing at Mane?
Saints posted it in reply to the FA's tweet telling us the goal was given as an OG :lol:

 

Posted

Ridiculous decision, just watched it back again from several angles. How anyone can decide it's an own goal is beyond me.

As said above for an own goal you have to know the original shot was off target, how the hell can they decide that?

When the original shot was defected by a desperate lunge from the defender about six inches after it left Mane's boot,

Does that now mean that every single deflection is an own goal?

Posted

Rewatched MOTD. That is Manés goal all day long. Ridiculous decision from the dubious goals panel.

 

Still, maybe it'll fire Mané up to score more. Ostenstadt's third against United still rankles. I still think he should've had a hat trick in the 6-3.

Posted

This decision only makes sense if the Dubious Goals people think the original shot was off target. Is there a definitive angle on this posted anywhere on the internets?

Posted

Wait for them to do the same for Cork's goal next. Then it'll be four own goals, and a shot into an empty net after a mistake by the keeper. They'll be saying we only scored three on our own.

Posted

Just watched again on iplayer- simply a bizarre decision.

 

But another complaint ..... which was dished up by some other journos on twitter after the game and by Jonathan pearce on match of the day after Mane's goal.

 

This wasn't Southampton biggest win after the 6 - 3 win over Man Utd with the grey shirt nonsense - The grey shirts was the 3 -1 win.....don't mind the tabloids getting things so wrong, but the BBC?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04mm14d/match-of-the-day-20142015-18102014

Posted

Couldn't agree more about the terrible priorities - how we don't look at diving etc but can voter with this is pathetic

 

Also, and possibly more importantly, does this mean Tadic no longer has the joint assist record???? This would be crazy if true

Posted
  The9 said:
For it to be classed as an own goal the ball must have been initially going wide OR its forward momentum towards the goal must have been stopped. I've never yet seen an OG classed as such if the ball is on target.

 

So they have to have decided that Mane's original contact was going wide (to the other side of the goal), and having watched it about 10 times on slow-mo from various angles, there is absolutely no way they can tell where Mane's shot was going without using some kind of super-slow-mo video technology.

 

But the main point is that I don't think anyone in the ground (including Mane and Van Aanholt) even considered that it was actually an own goal. So why even bother judging on it? It's not like the defender WANTS the OG.

 

It's even crapper than taking Dodd's Skate corner off him and giving it to Pasanen who headed it off the bar into the net from the post, or Egil's hat-trick against Man U.

 

 

Agreed, ridiculous decision, just odd.

 

I take it there has been a decision on Pelle's goal as well?

Posted
  Under Weststand said:
Ridiculous decision, just watched it back again from several angles. How anyone can decide it's an own goal is beyond me.

As said above for an own goal you have to know the original shot was off target, how the hell can they decide that?

When the original shot was defected by a desperate lunge from the defender about six inches after it left Mane's boot,

Does that now mean that every single deflection is an own goal?

 

I honestly do think this smacks of a "lets beat on Southampton's parade, and keep them in their place" sort of attitude.

 

It really makes you wonder at any rate.

Posted

The defender's foot did deflect the ball but I understood the 'rules' were that they (the 'dubious goal panel') had to be 100% certain that the ball wouldn't have gone in the back of the net without the defender's intervention.

 

Looking at the replay footage, I can't see how anyone could be "100% certain" that the ball wouldn't have gone in, which would tend to suggest that maybe I/we don't understand the rules that the panel are duty bound to abide by. Perhaps they don't have to be "100% certain" and are allowed to use their discretion and/or an element of probability or gut feel?

 

Does anyone know for sure what "rules" the panel are instructed to adhere to?

 

That said, I still think its harsh to deny Mane the goal, whatever the rules might say.

Posted
  trousers said:
The defender's foot did deflect the ball but I understood the 'rules' were that they (the 'dubious goal panel') had to be 100% certain that the ball wouldn't have gone in the back of the net without the defender's intervention.

 

Looking at the replay footage, I can't see how anyone could be "100% certain" that the ball wouldn't have gone in, which would tend to suggest that maybe I/we don't understand the rules that the panel are duty bound to abide by. Perhaps they don't have to be "100% certain" and are allowed to use their discretion and/or an element of probability or gut feel?

 

Does anyone know for sure what "rules" the panel are instructed to adhere to?

 

That said, I still think its harsh to deny Mane the goal, whatever the rules might say.

From 2006 but I don't think the criterion has changed:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2006/aug/23/theknowledge.sport

 

"As a rule, if the initial attempt is goalbound it is credited to the player making the goal attempt," explained a Premier League spokesman. "However if the deflection means that a wayward effort results in a goal then it is attributed to the player who had the last definitive touch of the ball."

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...