***saints v city official match thread***

[Foreverinbluedreams]

Of course it was a penalty.

Slowing it down x 10 to see if there was a fingernail from foster...

Pmsl

Everyone in the pub shouted peno in real time. And then again on the replays.

But the ref... just... knew it wasn't.

Fuck. Off.

To be fair the ref has the perfect angle to see the ball change direction from Forster's glove

as their tame studio ref pointed out in the BT replays , the Forster fingernail didn't move the ball out of Sane's reach but his giant paw did wrap itself around his ankle and bring him down. Only bonehead City haters like the BBC commentator and Shearer could claim it was no penalty.

I must be a bonehead City hater so.

Sané should've shot when one on one.

[everyonehatesus]

And no yellow for the tackle on kun, studs down the back of the calf infront of the ref but nope just a foul.
My guess today is that hazard will be kicked to fuck all over the place, and then a chav will be sent off in the second half.

[Peter Doherty (AGAIG)]

NBC saying it was not a pen and a good save as we see them switch to the side angle and foster whack Sané's foot.

Forster gets something on it. It wasn't a pen and one angle showed it to be so. The question was what the referee saw. I suspect it looked more like a pen. But he made the right decision more out of luck than judgment, but for me Forster deffo got something on the ball.

you say definately got something on it - but the ball never changes trajectory after Sane kicks it - the more I see it the more convinced I am that Forster missed it.

I take it all back, there's one angle where you can see the ball change direction after contact with his glove. I agree with you about the ref accidentally making the right call though, very little went our way with decisions today.

And I call absolute bullshit. No matter how many angles of it I see, it's a penalty.

I couldn't give s toss if he got a fingernail (and I still don't believe he god) to it. He brought Sane down.
They can try to justify it all they like. It was a penalty.

Where's OD when you need him.

As far as the rules are concerned (no one on MOTD knows them) the goalkeeper getting a fingernail to the ball is irrelevant. It was a penalty as he took out the player.

[Peter Doherty (AGAIG)]

It was a penalty, it is also an own goal if we do no sell out the Semi next Sunday to support City.

My understanding is that the we have and the extra tickets we've been trying to sell are coming from the lack of uptake from the Gooners. Make of that what you will (it could be bollocks, of course).

[london blue 2]

As far as the rules are concerned (no one on MOTD knows them) the goalkeeper getting a fingernail to the ball is irrelevant. It was a penalty as he took out the player.

What are you on about, didn't you know there are different rules for contact in the penalty area?

[Peter Doherty (AGAIG)]

As far as the rules are concerned (no one on MOTD knows them) the goalkeeper getting a fingernail to the ball is irrelevant. It was a penalty as he took out the player.

What are you on about, didn't you know there are different rules for contact in the penalty area?

Depressingly fair point.

[gmercer1]

As far as the rules are concerned (no one on MOTD knows them) the goalkeeper getting a fingernail to the ball is irrelevant. It was a penalty as he took out the player.

What are you on about, didn't you know there are different rules for contact in the penalty area?

And different rules when they are on a City player

[Scatman]

What does Leroy Sane have to say about it?

[patrickblue]

Thought we were brilliant yesterday.
TBH, I was expecting the worst, not converting our chances and a defensive cock up for a 1-0 to them, but happily I was just proved to be a cynical old bastard.
Made my week big time.

[Tokyo Blue]

Sané should've shot when one on one.

What's that got to do with whether it was a foul or not?

[Foreverinbluedreams]

Sané should've shot when one on one.

What's that got to do with whether it was a foul or not?

Nothing, just an observation.

[Tokyo Blue]

Sané should've shot when one on one.

What's that got to do with whether it was a foul or not?

Nothing, just an observation.

My observation is that there is nothing at all wrong with rounding the keeper, which Sane had done before he was upended.

[Foreverinbluedreams]

Sané should've shot when one on one.

What's that got to do with whether it was a foul or not?

Nothing, just an observation.

My observation is that there is nothing at all wrong with rounding the keeper, which Sane had done before he was upended.

Don't think there's anything wrong with trying to round him either, just believe he should've shot on that occasion.

[Tokyo Blue]

Well, he would have scored if he hadn't been fouled. It is not Leroy's fault the ref didn't do his job properly so I don't think criticising him when he has done nothing wrong is fair at all.

[Foreverinbluedreams]

Fair enough, I probably should've made that observation completely separate to the debate about the penalty. I just think in that type of situation when the keeper isn't right on top of you that you should shoot, especially when you have the shooting capability that Sané has but the same goes for anyone in that position.

[iwasthere2012]

Fair enough, I probably should've made that observation completely separate to the debate about the penalty. I just think in that type of situation when the keeper isn't right on top of you that you should shoot, especially when you have the shooting capability that Sané has but the same goes for anyone in that position.

I thought at the time that he should have shot, but he had rounded the keeper on his left foot and I believe he would have scored.

It's sad that my instinct of 'SHOOT', has as much to do with the fact that I'm conditioned to us not getting penalties when taken down so would much rather see us finish early and clinically than risking the 50/50 of rounding a keeper.

[nottsblue]

I love seeing a player round the keeper and pass the ball into an empty net. No finer sight

[Tokyo Blue]

I love seeing a player round the keeper and pass the ball into an empty net. No finer sight

I do as well, mate.

[Mikhail Chigorin]

As far as the rules are concerned (no one on MOTD knows them) the goalkeeper getting a fingernail to the ball is irrelevant. It was a penalty as he took out the player.

What are you on about, didn't you know there are different rules for contact in the penalty area?

And different rules when they are on a City player

I didn't think there were any rules when fouling City players. Rules would only get in the way and could confuse the referee.

[Tokyo Blue]

Fair enough, I probably should've made that observation completely separate to the debate about the penalty. I just think in that type of situation when the keeper isn't right on top of you that you should shoot, especially when you have the shooting capability that Sané has but the same goes for anyone in that position.

Yeah, mate, I sometimes think you should shoot on sight but like notts said, it is lovely seeing your striker stroke the ball into an empty net with the keeper stranded. And Sane can do both and that puts the keeper very much in two minds, which is no bad thing.