You are here

Home » Forums » General discussion

Do the rules not apply when they could benefit West Ham?

moore2come's picture
Submitted by moore2come on Wed, 25/02/2015 - 03:02

Forums:

DG has advised there is no recourse to appeal the penalty "goal" scored by the Spuds on Sunday which left a draw away feeling like a huge defeat. The rules state the goal should not have stood but we're powerless to do anything about it cos the rules say we can't. What's the point of the rule then?

Surely we're entitled to some form of compensation? Every other club seems to be able to benefit at our expense or we're 'rightly' punished if in the eyes of someone else we've done wrong, well clearly here we were robbed. So if we can't appeal to FIFA, can't seek compensation from Spuds then surely we should be able to sue the Premier League for the incompetance of the referee. He clearly doesn't know the rules, so when they're broken someone must be held accountable. We can't sue him directly otherwise no-one would ever be a ref but we should certainly be able to sue his employer for some of their vast sunms of money. This potentially could cost us a million in league position. We should either do it now, or outline our intention to do it at the end of the season should those 2 points lost in anyway affect where we finish in the legue.
Bullyhammer's picture

Bullyhammer

Wed, 25/02/2015 - 07:50

Trouble is, there's enough vagueness written into the rules to allow them to wriggle out, we'd lose. Best to just save the injustice up, and hit Spuds another time when it will hurt them worse. What goes around comes around...

up
141 users have voted.
moore 6 legend's picture

moore 6 legend

Wed, 25/02/2015 - 08:50

I just knew we were robbed! just as well we are at the right end of the table and not fighting Religion or even worse those 2 pts lost sent us down

up
145 users have voted.
chubbyTURK's picture

chubbyTURK

Wed, 25/02/2015 - 15:21

I agree moore that either rules are implemented or they are not but the FA will never ever take a goal away that was given.
As you say everything against West Ham seems to go through like knife through soft butter.

up
137 users have voted.
asheshammer's picture

asheshammer

Sat, 28/02/2015 - 09:19

On the subject: Goals that were given get taken away all the time. I saw it happen against West Ham very recently -- the goal was given by the ref, the linesman informed the ref that it was offside (it wasn't) and it was taken away -- Arsenal wasn't it? We were a goal to the good. The present case is worse, because it really was the very end of the match, so there is nothing whatsoever to stop the FA from correcting the score. Rules are supposed to be rules.

up
131 users have voted.
moore 6 legend's picture

moore 6 legend

Sat, 28/02/2015 - 11:52

Yeah that was song's volley v the arse completely confusing this offside rule lately!

up
136 users have voted.

yeah think you might have mis-interpreted the last two words of my post Jozi , when i say "lays down " i dont mean in a literal sense . lol

up
233 users have voted.

Burkie 1

Cathammer's picture

Cathammer

Mon, 02/03/2015 - 08:17

Can anybody explain to me why the goal should not have stood. I've had a look at the rules and Adrian played the ball, if it had hit the posts and come back to him then the goal would not have stood. Am I missing something here.

up
136 users have voted.
moore2come's picture

moore2come

Tue, 07/04/2015 - 01:46

Saw another example of this and unbelievable that it took place. Head injuries as a result of a clash. Now I'm pretty sure that in almost every game I've seen this season that as soon as there's a clash of heads and players are down the ref stops the game to allow treatment. So why on Earth did this not take place in the lead up to Leicester's winner?

up
141 users have voted.

Next Fixture(s)