Sutton v Barrow match thread

[kikka]

It was another close run thing for us today ... I think perhaps we suffered against this team from not having a few more of our tall players available ...nevertheless , against Sutton who are usually a very effective home side ... and facing a bombardment , not to mention quite a bit of rough play ...bordering on foul play .... it was another good effort . If we cool down, recover our strength and work hard to get another win in the next game we will be back 'on track'. Great effort lads ... let's relax and then go again .

[mickmike wilson]

Seems bizarre that a club can contend a red or yellow but can’t contend a goal with the FA.

We'd get FA out of the FA if we could dispute it!

That’s simply not true, The FA would find a way to dock us an extra 3 points, Our face doesn’t fit grrrrr

[Pointless game]

Every game we’ve played so far there’s been a talking point / late drama. Today we find ourselves on the wrong side of the result. Getting the score on Flashscore that we’ve equalised then to have the dreaded “correction” feels like an extra kick at the very end. Never mind. It would have been tough playing it in that heat. What I cant fathom is games playing for near on 100 minutes these days seems to be the norm. Right across the league many games playing 97/98+ minutes. Drinks breaks I presume.

Yesterday
7 subs in 2nd half. 4 mins min.

2 mins drinks break.

Normal 2 or 3 mins for injury.

Normal nowadays. Especially with subs?

[Holkerbird]

I think a positive from this game is yet again we showed that we never ever give up until the final whistle and that last minute goal---yes it was despite what the inept, incompetent officials ruled-- proved it.
A fighting spirit is vital to our competing and heads do not drop as witnessed against Stockport.
A new game on Tuesday night with more comfortable playing conditions.
We have a great manager and squad.
Onward and Upward.

[HenneysKnee]

Yes it’s easy when you watch back etc but it’s pretty unbelievable that none of the ref, the linesman or the fourth official saw that the keeper touched that ball for our “goal”

[Valkyrie]

Sutton fans debating the Barrow goal on their own forum.

"Watched their goal on youtube in slow motion (0.25). Keeper does not touch the ball. Absolutely right call.
Also, Tope does not foul the keeper. The keeper lands on him while being completely disoriented about the ball.
Great calls from the ref. Lucky to have him making the right calls in such close situations".


"He definitely did touch the ball. House and Matt Gray said so. I spoke to Matt after the game. I also saw it with my own eyes. The ref got it wrong along with many other decisions sadly. And, as for the lino on the Rec side, Jeez he was shocking and blind. Must have had something in his eye all game".

[Gazza]

Yes Farman misjudged the bounce for their goal but how the hell is that not a foul on him after the bounce? As for the disallowed goal, I have no more words for these officials anymore.

[SKIPPER]

Just a couple of general questions in relation to yesterday and other comments on this thread. Firstly why is a free-kick for offside indirect? It is always in your own half and the only goals scored from your own half almost always come with the element of surprise not against a prepared and organised defence. On the subject of added time it has always puzzled me why time is added on for substitutions. ALL substitutions take place when play has stopped so technically no time is lost. I appreciate that there is a degree of timewasting on substitutions which in a way this is designed to alleviate (doesn't work) but given that this usually occurs as the clock is running down this could be stopped by saying no substitutions in the last 15 minutes with possible provisos (goalkeepers injury etc)

[blue blue boy]

Free kicks for off side are always in direct as they are classed as 'technical foul' other examples may be a high boot a back pass to the keeper etc. Other fouls with contact are not indirect for example if someone brings a player down handball etc etc. All in the laws of the game mate.
As for added time, not sure I'm in agreement there re your interpretation of the watch running etc. As long as time is added for stoppages then fair do's

[Jim]

Free kicks for off side are always in direct as they are classed as 'technical foul' other examples may be a high boot a back pass to the keeper etc. Other fouls with contact are not indirect for example if someone brings a player down handball etc etc. All in the laws of the game mate.
As for added time, not sure I'm in agreement there re your interpretation of the watch running etc. As long as time is added for stoppages then fair do's

The amount of added time is getting ridiculous. I commented after watching some of the women's Euros that, on average, their added time was only 2 or 3 minutes. The time allowance for substitutions doesn't make sense. No need to add time at all: ball goes out of play, 4th official signals substitution, ref stops watch, sub comes on, ref restarts play and restatrts watch.

The alternative to it all is to have something like I saw on the hockey on TV recently, where there is a 'match clock', which stops when there is an interruption in play. This might require changes to technology at the ground, for example the 4th official being the timekeeper with some link from him/her to the time display at the ground.

Old fogey that I am, I remember when a match started at 3pm and usually finished quite promptly at 4.40 or 4.45 after a 10 minute half time

[John_Bucks]

All in the laws of the game mate.

He never said it wasn’t, just asked why and I tend to agree. Offside is always at least half a pitch away from the opposition goal. Who is shooting from there?

[Middleton Nick]

Old fogey that I am, I remember when a match started at 3pm and usually finished quite promptly at 4.40 or 4.45 after a 10 minute half time Jim » Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:38 am

David Coleman's teleprinter would burst into life with FT scores at 1640 and be smoking at 1645 one after the other.

[blue blue boy]

I think in relation to time added it has a lot to do with tv influence. In the good old days the referee might add an arbitrary amount of time for subs and injuries etc but with the scrutiny now placed on such things by tv pundits and the like particularly at the top flight there is no longer that luxury. This added to the increased number of subs and drinks breaks etc and you would always expect yesterday's game to run to approaching 100 mins. As you may have gathered I'm a (recently former) referee. I used to have 2 watches, 1 counting up 1 counting down. I stopped my watch that was counting down for goals, substitutions, injuries etc AS APPROPRIATE - not all instances would require me stopping the watch, subs however were always stopped - that way when my watch counting up hit 45 I knew by looking at my other watch how much time to signal i would add.
As for the indirect for off side, get your point re being in your own half etc, I guess that's just a case of thems the rules

[bluessupporter]

As I said before if that attempt by Rooney had been ruled as a goal nobody would be moaning as it was in the 6th minute of extra time!

[Main Stand SeasonTct]

An unwritten rule used by referees is to add 30 seconds per substitution and 30 seconds per goal plus any time for players being treated for injuries.