Forest | Page 2 | Vital Football

Forest

Sometimes I love football but most of the time I despise it. It's cruel and full of hatred. The long tentacles of this hatred seek me out and ultimately find me no matter where I am and ruin countless Saturday nights. There is no hiding place.
 
It is a cruel game and we were robbed of 2 points. Weak ref and I don’t believe they should of had a penalty. Really soft challenge by Morsy who did connect with the ball . We should and need too take our chances better and kill the game. No complaints from me though we are playing some great football and will only get better this season. Up the tics.
 
I am naturally disappointed with the result but i can not complain about the entertainment value.
It was said on telly last night, watching Wigan you do not know what you are going to get. Can't wait for the next home league fixture, but we do need to learn to be more professional.
 
Thought Ben Watson's behaviour was a disgrace, you accept there is absolutely no loyalty in football and i expected no favours but he was leading the harassment of the referee trying to deliberately con him at every turn his histrionics were embarrassing. He wasnt the only one trying to bully the ref but he was by far the most forceful and you know he didn't used to be like that. You know every team appeals for everything including ourselves but Forest were so cynically over the top it was Oscar worthy play acting - but it worked so maybe we need to stop respecting referee and get every outfield player surround the ref, get in his face and hysterically scream at him until we eventually get our way.

Cook respecting referees in his post match interview is very noble and classy in principle but this joke of a ref has robbed us twice in the last two game he has officiated us and to let him get away without a word being said again about such a poor / weak / biased whatever anyone wants to call his performance is something i disagree with. Cook doesnt have to go all Ben Watson and make a scene but i think he had every right to make a point about just how awful we had be treated by such a terrible ref.

I don't like to throw all the blame on a ref for a negative result as often we will be more than culpable in our own downfall and you accept its a hard job and sometimes you will make genuine mustakes. But yesterday was like having 2 different sets of rules for each team. That's the most angry I've been at a ref in a very long time.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
Thought Ben Watson's behaviour was a disgrace, you accept there is absolutely no loyalty in football and i expected no favours but he was leading the harassment of the referee trying to deliberately con him at every turn his histrionics were embarrassing.
Click to expand...

I don't buy into this I'm afraid. He plays for Forest now and that's where his loyalty rightly is. Personally I thought it was a penalty and don't see why the ref was confused in the first instance. On second viewing, he maybe didn't get the touch, but still very naive to put a foot in like that when he had no hope of reaching the ball. As for surrounding the ref, we were accused of that many times last season and I thought the same then - it happens in football and not one team is innocent of it. You'll always view it as justified depending on your agenda.
Ultimately the performance was pleasing, the ref disappointing, the result could and possibly should have been better, but it's yet another game I'm coming away from feeling happy and entertained. I'm finding football is not making or breaking my weekend and I love it
 
Last edited:
Kendal Blue said:
I don't buy into this I'm afraid. He plays for Forest now and that's where his loyalty rightly is.
Click to expand...
You are right, he does have loyalty to Forest now, but after the reception our fans gave him at various times during the game it was disrespectful of him to lead the referee harassment like he did.
He has definately gone down in my estimation, I always liked him even when he was being citicised by some, but I for one will not be clapping him again when we next play Forest or whichever team he plays for. Shame on you BW
 
Last edited:
The only reason that the ref can justify not sending off the guy who fouled Grigg is if he thought the cross was too high for Grigg to reach. Then it doesn’t become denying of a goal scoring opportunity & so just a caution for a pull
I’ve only seen the foul on my iPhone screen & it wasn’t great quality but I’m not sure that Grigg would have reached it.

For their pen, Their guy played for it by leaving his leg in & made the most of the contact but I think that in all probability it was a penalty.
If you look at the refs position at the time of the challenge though, I think that there’s a player blocking his view of it & he’s asked for his assts input whilst telling the Forest players to back off.
When the assts told him that he thinks it was a foul he’s given it but coz he’s been surrounded by a possee of Forest players it looks like he’s changed his mind coz they’ve pressured him
 
I understand the disappointment 2ward sir Ben. However the anger should be directed toward the referee for allowing himself to be harangued in such a manner. I thought this behaviour had been eliminated from the game and was disgusting to watch. Perhaps not on the same levels as the Colombians against England at the World Cup but not far off. His failure to issue a yellow card in the opening minute to pantillimon 4 holding and not releasing the ball so we could take our corner set the tone. Then by failing to dismiss the Forest defender for our penalty my confidence eroded and sadly I wasn't surprised with what happened at the end. It is also disappointing Cook wasn't more vociferous in his post match deliberations in regards the referees performance. On another note a very encouraging performance from ourselves and once we eliminate naivety from our display we can comfortably compete at this level.
 
There’s no difference at all Kenny it’s players surrounding the ref to try & influence their decision
In the City game it was our lot in order to get him to send a player off whilst yesterday it was Forest players trying to get him to given them an injury time penalty to salvage a point in a game they should have lost.

Also, people expecting Ben Watson not to appeal to the ref coz he played for us, scored the winning goal in a cup final & got a warm reception is ridiculous.
He plays for Forest. They’re his team mates now. They pay his wages now & no doubt they got a points bonus with that last minute equaliser - of course he’s going to appeal
 
Mighty, I disagree. I've just seen the highlights on tv and they reaffirm my initial instincts. With the first penalty Grigg was 8 yards from goal bang in the centre. He would have reached the ball but was being blatantly and cynically pulled back. That is unquestionably a red card for making no attempt to get the ball and denying a clear and obvious goal scoring opportunity. The referees indecision and inability to control players was evident in that incident also and he allowed himself to be influenced by protesting payers. I'm afraid it was an inexplicable decision and unquestionably wrong.

In regards the Forest penalty he never gave it until surrounded by eight protesting forest players which changed his mind. Completely weak and utterly incompetent. I'm afraid his weak officiating does his colleagues no favours and will just encourage more teams to behave in this manner. It's not an isolated incident with this bloke as we saw at blackbur last year. If they want to increase respect toward referees then a first step would be to reeducate this tosser and if no improvement then remove him from officiating at any level.
 
Made in Wigan said:
Mighty, I disagree. I've just seen the highlights on tv and they reaffirm my initial instincts. With the first penalty Grigg was 8 yards from goal bang in the centre. He would have reached the ball but was being blatantly and cynically pulled back. That is unquestionably a red card for making no attempt to get the ball and denying a clear and obvious goal scoring opportunity. The referees indecision and inability to control players was evident in that incident also and he allowed himself to be influenced by protesting payers. I'm afraid it was an inexplicable decision and unquestionably wrong.

In regards the Forest penalty he never gave it until surrounded by eight protesting forest players which changed his mind. Completely weak and utterly incompetent. I'm afraid his weak officiating does his colleagues no favours and will just encourage more teams to behave in this manner. It's not an isolated incident with this bloke as we saw at blackbur last year. If they want to increase respect toward referees then a first step would be to reeducate this tosser and if no improvement then remove him from officiating at any level.
Click to expand...

The distance Grigg was from goal doesn’t really matter - it’s whether he’d have been able to jump high enough. From the view I’ve seen I think there’s enough doubt that the cross was too high for Grigg to get to. If the ref thought that then it’s a caution - not saying he was right, but that would have been his thinking & not coz he bottled it.

Likewise for their pen - I’ve said I know how it looks but it’s not the Forest players who will have changed his mind but (coz his view was obscured) the asst telling him it was a foul as he’s asking the Forest players to back away. It wasn’t the Forest players changing his mind

Having been one myself I know how the officials work and what the ref’s body language & movement is indicating. As I’ve said it looks poor coz he didn’t get the players to back off & didn’t go over to the asst to show he was consulting him (although they speak through their headsets), but again he’s not bottled it. He (& his asst) may have got the decision wrong but they’ve not allowed anyone to influence anything or bottled it
 
No one has said they didn't expect Watson or any Forest player to appeal or he owed us anything. It doesn't matter if Watson played for us or not, I'd have critasised his behaviour exactly the same - he was leading the hysterical, over the top play acting to deliberetly con the ref into making a non decision a penalty (i can't see how anyone could say that was a penalty - if we'd have got it i'd have said the ref got it wrong). Regarding last season with City - the potential leg breaker - that is exactly the point. If one of our lads had made a challenge like that yesterday and Watson and the Forest players crowded round the ref in outrage I'd not say anything as it was understandable / justified - the difference was they were making that type of scene for a massive dive. I can't recall our player doing that other than against City and especially not over complete con jobs last season. If someone can recall an instance when we made such a scene for an obvious non penalty then we shouldn't have - it's way over the line. But after this i think 'f--- it why should we have any standards, if that was a penalty then we should start appealing like that for anything and everything too'.

It's cheating, it happens in football but Forest player must have all been going to drama classes after training the way they were appealing for the tiniest inflingement like it was a leg breaking challenge. Not sure i can remember when i've seen such a shamelessly over the top attempt to con the the ref. But granted the officials shouldn't be so weak to just give in when it was so obvious what Forest were doing. If you give penalties for that you give about 15 per game every as every time there is any brush of contact in the area you just have to fling yourself in the air and wait for your team mates to make a scene worthy of an Academy Award. That isn't a penalty at any point in a game so how can a ref who's got to this level of the game not see that it was a desperate attempt to cheat in the last minute because they weren't good enough to get a goal any other way?

I thought he was going to book the lad for diving originally and then the Forest players weighed in and suddenly it's a penalty - it seemed he thought 'they've gone ballistic asking for so many penalties i can't turn down another one, they were bound to be right on one of them and i've given Wigan one so it's only fair i even it up'.

I accept diving and s--- housing are part of football, we do some of it ourselves but that penalty claim and the decision from the ref was pushing the boat out on cheating and utterly disgraceful.
 
Last edited:
Mighty Bongsmon said:
The distance Grigg was from goal doesn’t really matter - it’s whether he’d have been able to jump high enough. From the view I’ve seen I think there’s enough doubt that the cross was too high for Grigg to get to. If the ref thought that then it’s a caution - not saying he was right, but that would have been his thinking & not coz he bottled it.

Likewise for their pen - I’ve said I know how it looks but it’s not the Forest players who will have changed his mind but (coz his view was obscured) the asst telling him it was a foul as he’s asking the Forest players to back away. It wasn’t the Forest players changing his mind

Having been one myself I know how the officials work and what the ref’s body language & movement is indicating. As I’ve said it looks poor coz he didn’t get the players to back off & didn’t go over to the asst to show he was consulting him (although they speak through their headsets), but again he’s not bottled it. He (& his asst) may have got the decision wrong but they’ve not allowed anyone to influence anything or bottled it
Click to expand...

The distance from goal does matter as it forms part of decision making process in determining if it was a clear and obvious goal scoring opportunity. I appreciate you never saw the incident live and are only making a judgement of a phone but the ball was eminently reachable by Grigg, in fact it lands about a yard from him so the trajectory tells you he would have reached it. Given the cynical nature of the foul - a pull - the benefit of doubt is not on the defenders side at that point. Effectively you pull someone down 8 yards from the centre of goal without making any attempt to get the ball and preventing them from doing so then it is a red card. No debate about it and an easy decision.

His general performance throughout the game was poor, with a general lack of consistency. Minutes before the forest penalty he failed to control a minor flash point that led to a melee of which he had zero control over. People were asking why fox was not dismissed, mistakenly believing he had received a first yellow card in the Grigg incident. I understand why people thought that as he waved a card toward him a good minute after awarding the penalty following the earlier harassment, when the one who did actually cause the foul was at that point some distance away fearing the red. I understood this behaviour was due to be cracked down on but there were four or five incidents in the game were he allowed himself to be surrounded by protesting forest players and on not one occasion did he seek to address this with the captain or book any players. This is indicative of a weak and ineffective official and as such I've no doubt he was pressured into changing his mind for the second penalty by the eight players haranguing him.
 
I can’t comment on whether he was any good at other points in the game, but there’s no way he changed his mind on the penalty to Forest. None whatsoever- there’s not a ref I’ve ever seen at any level do that let alone an EFL one. He didn’t handle it well & I know how it looks but I’m just trying to give an insight as to why it looked like it did rather than a partisan, he cheated us view point.

Similarly if I can look at it & my initial reaction is that Grigg might not have got to the ball then there’s every chance the ref thought that too. Doesn’t make us right, just that it’s a feasible view to take.
It has to be a denial of an obvious goal scoring opportunity and if there’s any doubt as to whether Grigg would have got the ball (& there is coz at least 2 people think so ?) then a ref can only give a caution. Like I said he may be wrong, but imo there’s enough distance for Grigg to travel & enough dip required on the cross to say for certain that Grigg would have got there. Hence for me it’s not an obvious goal scoring opportunity- had the ball been at Grigg’s feet when he was hauled back then it would have been a red
 
You must log in or register to reply here.