Jump to content
talkfootball365
  • Welcome to talkfootball365!

    The better place to talk football.

West Ham 3-2 Chelsea - Wednesday 1st July, 2020


Recommended Posts

  • Administrator
Posted

Kick-off 20.15

Live on Sky Sports

1200px-West_Ham_United_FC_logo.svg.png     VS     1200px-Chelsea_FC.svg.png

Head to Head
West Ham - 41
Draws - 22
Chelsea - 48

Reverse Fixture
Chelsea 0-1 West Ham

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted
5 minutes ago, Stan said:

All West Ham ain't we?

I'm okay with Chelsea winning tbh. I don't really like Chelsea all that much, other than the Chelsea fans on here... I actually think Chelsea & fans are a bunch of cunts tbh, but letting them lock down 3rd place is fine by me after they beat City.

And I don't really have anything against West Ham as a club, I just hate the porno brothers and Karen Brady... so I've been fine with the idea of them going down for a while.

  • Administrator
Posted
5 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I'm okay with Chelsea winning tbh. I don't really like Chelsea all that much, other than the Chelsea fans on here... I actually think Chelsea & fans are a bunch of cunts tbh, but letting them lock down 3rd place is fine by me after they beat City.

And I don't really have anything against West Ham as a club, I just hate the porno brothers and Karen Brady... so I've been fine with the idea of them going down for a while.

You are now irrelevant in the season so be quiet.

Posted
15 minutes ago, Stan said:

You are now irrelevant in the season so be quiet.

This is the most relevant Liverpool have ever been in any premier league season ever

  • Administrator
Posted

West Ham take the lead!!

Soucek scrambles in from a corner.

  • Administrator
Posted

Oh fuck off. Antonio's head while he's on the floor is offside xD

  • Administrator
Posted

Can't believe that was given offside. Kepa's view is not blocked and Antonio didn't touch it.

 

Pulisic gains a penalty and Willian slots it away easily. 0-1.

  • The title was changed to West Ham 0-1 (Willian, 42") Chelsea - Wednesday 1st July, 2020
  • The title was changed to West Ham (Soucek, 45+2") 1-1 Chelsea - Wednesday 1st July, 2020
Posted

Can someone explain to me why Dave is marking the tallest player on the pitch whilst Tammy Abraham, sitting at 6'3, is marking the post? All bloody season our marking at set pieces has been embarrassing. 

Awful from us. Should be 2-1 to West Ham as for the life of me, I haven't the slightest idea why that VAR decision was given. Antonio doesn't even touch the ball. 

 

  • Subscriber
Posted

I'm actually fuming at that disallowed goal. A competition that determines that that isn't a goal has no credibility. It's absolutely beyond a joke.

Kepa pretty sharp there appealing for offside against Antonio or is that just football now every time a goal is scored, wave your arms around and appeal for some generic offence that has occurred against you so that VAR look at it until they find an excuse to disallow it?

Posted
1 minute ago, RandoEFC said:

I'm actually fuming at that disallowed goal. A competition that determines that that isn't a goal has no credibility. It's absolutely beyond a joke.

Kepa pretty sharp there appealing for offside against Antonio or is that just football now every time a goal is scored, wave your arms around and appeal for some generic offence that has occurred against you so that VAR look at it until they find an excuse to disallow it?

Exactly that!!

  • Administrator
Posted
1 minute ago, RandoEFC said:

Kepa pretty sharp there appealing for offside against Antonio or is that just football now every time a goal is scored, wave your arms around and appeal for some generic offence that has occurred against you so that VAR look at it until they find an excuse to disallow it?

Definitely this.

And if he even thinks Antonio is impeding his view (even if it does just turn out to be his head) there's not a chance he thinks it's offside from where he's standing. It's definitely 'appeal at all costs' in the hope someone, somewhere will be checking it.

The fact it's taken an age to determine a 'clear and obvious error' disappoints me. Same as what happened in our game (22 replays and 2+ minutes to see if Ndidi handballed it). For what it's worth, I think that was a penalty but the inconsistency of decisions in general based on human error/perception also is frustrating.

  • Subscriber
Posted
1 minute ago, Stan said:

Definitely this.

And if he even thinks Antonio is impeding his view (even if it does just turn out to be his head) there's not a chance he thinks it's offside from where he's standing. It's definitely 'appeal at all costs' in the hope someone, somewhere will be checking it.

The fact it's taken an age to determine a 'clear and obvious error' disappoints me. Same as what happened in our game (22 replays and 2+ minutes to see if Ndidi handballed it). For what it's worth, I think that was a penalty but the inconsistency of decisions in general based on human error/perception also is frustrating.

Eh, I think with the Ndidi one it was just hard to spot whether it his hand or Keane's first. Ndidi handles it first then it's a stonewall penalty, Keane does then it's a goal kick. The number of replays seemed pretty excessive but it was a case of checking whether something that's a definite offence happened or not.

This one was (yet another) example of them looking at the replays where the rule is open to interpretation to decide which sub-article of the rules they can fall back on to overturn a decision rather than looking for something that's clear and obvious which is the whole point of VAR. Okay there was a moment where Antonio's body was between Kepa and the ball but for fuck's sake.

  • Administrator
Posted
5 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Eh, I think with the Ndidi one it was just hard to spot whether it his hand or Keane's first. Ndidi handles it first then it's a stonewall penalty, Keane does then it's a goal kick. The number of replays seemed pretty excessive but it was a case of checking whether something that's a definite offence happened or not.

This one was (yet another) example of them looking at the replays where the rule is open to interpretation to decide which sub-article of the rules they can fall back on to overturn a decision rather than looking for something that's clear and obvious which is the whole point of VAR. Okay there was a moment where Antonio's body was between Kepa and the ball but for fuck's sake.

After about 5 or 6 views to me it was clear it had struck Ndidi's hand first. 

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...