Chelsea vs. Crystal Palace match thread

[Eagle-Trucker]

It is futile to attempt to ever convince Willo that a referee has made a mistake.

At most you will get an acknowledgement that all humans err on occasions and referees are no exception.

He is entitled to his opinion and probably knows more about the rules than many on here, but I fundamentally disagree about referees not making mistakes.
I would go further, and say that some are downright incompetent and not averse to covering each other's backs when obvious mistakes are made.

Yes agreed , I wonder sometimes if he is Red and Blue . He is AKA the prophet of doom . 🤔

 

[Jim_Cannon]

Just confirming that Gallagher stated this afternoon on Sky that the ref missed the Cucarella incident and the goal should have been chalked off.

Gallagher seems to always go against palace

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Gallagher seems to always go against palace

Gallagher goes against everybody without a whistle.

 

[Jim_Cannon]

Gallagher goes against everybody without a whistle.

True. Even his wife apparently and sent off the mother in law

 

[Teddy Eagle]

True. Even his wife apparently and sent off the mother in law

Big fan of Roger Whittaker though.

 

[pssguy]

May have been mentioned already but looks like that was the first time Chelsea have been shutout at home in any competition since the first day of last season

 

[Eaglecoops]

spot on, in defence of Willo, he's right of course that Law 13 was correctly applied, but the salient point is - it shouldn't have been. The ref was sent to check a possible foul NOT the 1 metre rule. And nobody can remember a single time it has been applied in six years, and I am confident to promise that if there really are no examples of overlooked encroachment I will be prepared to take whatever ready meal Willo's missus got from Waitrose and ram it up my *rse.

Don’t want to keep dragging this out, however do you know for sure that the ref was called to the monitor to look at a foul or was he asked to look at encroachment into the wall. The distinction is quite important because if he was going to look at the potential foul then that would have given him chance to look at law 13 infringement whilst looking at the foul. If however they said go and look for encroaching then they have exceeded their remit and this would have been completely wrong for them to do so.

I’d be interested to know where you got that information from.