Toenail Poll (1 Viewer)

Were we cheated

  • Yes

    Votes: 107 78.7%
  • No

    Votes: 29 21.3%

  • Total voters
    136

itsabuzzard

Well-Known Member
Yes. Torp will need counselling. Just sharpening the prongs on my pitchfork.
 

SkyblueTexan

Well-Known Member
Chelsea should have had a penalty in their semi (clear hand ball by Grealish) but wasn’t given. Such inconsistency over the 2 games.
Have seen it go either way and glad we got the pen. That should have no bearing on Torp’s goal which I am more confident was a legitimate goal. Don’t give me the toenail offside bullshit. Depending on the split second when you judge the ball to have been released, it could have been onside or offside. Too close to call and so the benefit of the doubt should be given to the attacker. Anyway Man C would have humiliated us in the final. Now I hope they humiliate Man U.
Getting to the Prem is more important than the FA Cup final for me. Hope we manage to keep our assets this summer and build on it for next season which I think will be pivotal.
 

Calista

Well-Known Member
Maybe I can help. I am sure that Haji was marginally (and very briefly) offside. The screenshots below are taken from the YouTube video from the reverse angle - .

On a PC (not a mobile) you can use shmmeee’s nice tip to pause the video at 17:38, then press full stop to advance frame by frame, or comma to go back one frame at a time.

Sadly Haji was offside ONLY for the tiny fractions of a second that they actually analyse, and only because he momentarily stuck his left leg out. I now feel happier knowing the decision was technically correct, even though I still think the excessively precise VAR procedures need to give forwards a bit more leeway.

But if you’d rather believe forever that we were robbed by a cockup or a conspiracy, feel free to present alternative facts. I am after all an agent of the deep state ;)

Wembley goal screenshots.png
 
Last edited:

Robinshio

Well-Known Member
Maybe I can help. I am sure that Haji was marginally (and very briefly) offside. The screenshots below are taken from the YouTube video from the reverse angle - .

On a PC (not a mobile) you can use shmmeee’s nice tip to pause the video at 17:38, then press full stop to advance frame by frame, or comma to go back one frame at a time.

Sadly Haji was offside ONLY for the tiny fractions of a second that they actually analyse, and only because he momentarily stuck his left leg out. I now feel happier knowing the decision was technically correct, even though I still think the excessively precise VAR procedures need to give forwards a bit more leeway.

But if you’d rather believe forever that we were robbed by a cockup or a conspiracy, feel free to present alternative facts. I am after all an agent of the deep state ;)

View attachment 35400

is it more than 5cm off, as that is the margin of error they use
 

Calista

Well-Known Member
is it more than 5cm off, as that is the margin of error they use
I couldn't say for sure, but in all honesty it does look more than that. Maybe 4 or 6 inches rather than 2 inches in old money. The margin of error should be more.

I think the simplest explanation is that the VAR guys (with access to far more precise tech than me) got it right according to their remit.

It's massively unlucky because Haji literally just pushes a foot out for a moment, gaining no material advantage at all, and in the blink of an eye he's back onside again.
 

Alkhen

Well-Known Member
Technically no. But VAR is ruining the game, no need to forensically search through for marginal infractions. The current system isn't clear enough, there are far too many moving parts for it to be truly accurate.I don't think it helps public opinion that they don't explain their working out.

Just make it clear light between the last man and attacker. Yes there will be marginal calls but at least there will be a degree of advantage to the attacker at that point and it will be easier to take if a goal gets ruled out.
 

pusbccfc

Well-Known Member
Ultimately we've been very unlucky with the decisions this season. We'll get our luck next season, we're due it.
 

ccfc922

Well-Known Member
Someone (a neutral) said to me yesterday that the Keeper for Sheafs pen was off the line so should of been retaked? Not sure how true, but I've not rewatched the game n it wouldn't surprise me.
 

The watchmaker

Well-Known Member
Someone (a neutral) said to me yesterday that the Keeper for Sheafs pen was off the line so should of been retaked? Not sure how true, but I've not rewatched the game n it wouldn't surprise me.
Make your own mind up. For me it goes down with the toe nail thing as, okay maybe you could technically argue onana should be penalised... but really...
 

itsabuzzard

Well-Known Member
Technically no. But VAR is ruining the game, no need to forensically search through for marginal infractions. The current system isn't clear enough, there are far too many moving parts for it to be truly accurate.I don't think it helps public opinion that they don't explain their working out.

Just make it clear light between the last man and attacker. Yes there will be marginal calls but at least there will be a degree of advantage to the attacker at that point and it will be easier to take if a goal gets ruled out.
The not explaining their working out is what gives the room for the conspiracy theory, and understand ably so. Rugby is way ahead of the round ball game in some ways, and this is one of them.
 

messiahrobins

Well-Known Member
Just a simple YES or NO, who still thinks we were cheated out of our victory last Sunday.
I'm still fuming, so that's a big fat YES from me.
Oh fuck it, it ain't going to make a difference.
Just seen Man Utd v Burnley on MOTD. Casemiro was given onside at the end (they didnt score) whn he was much further off than Wright was claimed to be (Wright was clearly onside).
We were cheated, but the whole world agrees pretty much and our standing has gone up exponentially as a result so there is the silver lining as we should now be able to attract a new level of players due to that increase in profile
 

standupforcity

Well-Known Member
Yellow cards are reset at the end of injury time if you didn't know. If you did know and just think it is a stupid rule... well that's a fair point. Also I would question why the second yellow didn't come sooner.
Yes I did know that.. and yes I'm suggesting it's another stupid loose end which needs to be addressed!
 

The watchmaker

Well-Known Member
Yes I did know that.. and yes I'm suggesting it's another stupid loose end which needs to be addressed!
Ah... my apologies!
The thing that gets me with this is that it surely isn't something which accidentally happened. It must be something people sat down at some stage, discussed and thought 'That makes sense!!'
Also irrelevant to me in this case because when onana was booked for time wasting he immediately walked off the pitch and went for a drink. 2nd yellow right there. He then really pushed it at every opportunity afterwards. Thought the ref had a decent game but onana was very lucky not to see red for me.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
The yes votes just happen to equal 87, the year we won the FA Cup.

And the no votes equal 21, the day in April we lost the FA Cup semi final.

Coincidence?
Well if you multiply 21 x 4 and add 3 you get 87. So thats 4 -3. If that's not conclusive then I don't know what is!
 

Happy_Martian

Well-Known Member
How long are you all going to hold on to this anger ?

Does it really matter now ?

Nothing to gain from relitigating this.

Otherwise, you'll all just turn into Sky Blue Sunderland fans.
 

Bad Boy

Well-Known Member
No more anger H_M

No, it doesn't matter anymore.

Nothing to gain from reigniting this.

No chance of ever being a Sky Blue Sunderland fan

This thread was just a silly bit of nonsense started by an old twat.

Sorry folks.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top