| Thoroughly unprofessional 18:32 - Dec 21 with 3711 views | Lblock |
Yes the ref was a Bertie Blunt but come on
I thought time added on should’ve been 5 at least so surprised at 4 being given.
That doesn’t matter.
We just haven’t got the fitness, the nouse, the nuts or ability to tough anything out and that HAS to change next season as a minimum, preferably the back nine of this.
Special mention number 1 to the fella by corner flag throwing ball away and giving the look at me ref cause to stop the game for god knows what and add that on.
Special mention number 2 to the ref... blatant pen not given, two footed lunges given as throw ons, pull back of Eze waved on for advantage but then not returning to book the player and also chasing Charlton players around to book them rather than managing the game and making them come back to him. Rubbish but what we’ve come to expect
QPR innit | |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |  |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 18:34 - Dec 21 with 3689 views | digswellhoop |
ðŸ¤ðŸ¤ðŸ¤ | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 18:38 - Dec 21 with 3674 views | connell10 |
Mentioned in the match thread the bloke throwing the ball away , the ref just added the time on . | |
| AND WHEN I DREAM , I DREAM ABOUT YOU AND WHEN I SCREAM I SCREAM ABOUT YOU!!!!! | | Poll: | best number 10 ever? |
| |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 19:09 - Dec 21 with 3542 views | kingo |
Their goal was scored on 90+5 when there was no time wasting by the teams and 4 minutes added. Ref was at fault. Unfortunately how many times have we/will we say that. He was poor throughout. Should have booked their player in the opening minute for a cynical foul on Eze and really didn’t officiate well at all. | |
| RIP: Sniffer, Doug and Pat |
| |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 19:19 - Dec 21 with 3512 views | ted_hendrix |
With all due respect mate it was us that should have seen out the game, the bloody ref didn't score their goal, for the life of me to concede like that is frustrating the last thing you wan't is the bloody ball in your box in the dying seconds of the game.
Can't be that difficult can it? | |
| My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic. |
| |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 19:24 - Dec 21 with 3484 views | kingo |
Up until that final free kick, I thought we played the final minutes really well. We kept the ball but didn’t time waste. Oh well weekend ruined as it seems like a loss | |
| RIP: Sniffer, Doug and Pat |
| |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 19:54 - Dec 21 with 3356 views | Match82 |
At least on the qpr plus coverage they did say five minutes. Did they announce 4 minutes in the ground?
That aside I didn't actually think the ref was too bad today. I don't think we'd have been complaining about him if we had won one more header and got the ball clear at the end | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 20:01 - Dec 21 with 3334 views | Walnut |
The tannoy said 4 but the board said 5. They scored 94.30 by my (stop) watch | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 20:05 - Dec 21 with 3313 views | LongsufferingR |
Exactly!! I was saying to the guy next to me on 94 minutes that we were seeing it out very well and more intelligently than usual. Just one missed header and lapse of concentration. | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 21:38 - Dec 21 with 3051 views | 1MoreBrightonR |
The board 100% said five. Can't moan about when it was scored, the announcer got it wrong and he doesn't have any say in it | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 14:38 - Dec 22 with 2674 views | PinnerPaul |
4 mins added they scored 4 mins and 50 seconds | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 14:46 - Dec 22 with 2655 views | CroydonCaptJack |
Totally agree. | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 14:46 - Dec 22 with 2655 views | smegma |
Paul Morrissey read out 4 minutes but he was wrong apparently. The ref added 5 mins . The tv screens in the SAR stand showed showed + 5 on the top of the screen. | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 15:02 - Dec 22 with 2624 views | PinnerPaul |
Board in the ground said 4 I thought - will have to wait for 90' to be posted to see if its on there. | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 15:07 - Dec 22 with 2620 views | smegma |
I know, that's what I said. The Sky TV screens said + plus 5. When I mentioned it to a press bloke he said ref added 5. I believe there was a discussion with the 4th official who then informed Sky it was 5. | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 15:13 - Dec 22 with 2603 views | PinnerPaul |
So did the board show 4 or 5? | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 15:18 - Dec 22 with 2598 views | daveB |
I didn't think we were unprofessional, we had done really well for the last 20 minutes and never looked in a any real danger it was just a simple mistake by Cameron that cost us badly | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 15:23 - Dec 22 with 2574 views | stowmarketrange |
I thought the board said 5, so I was surprised to hear him say 4 minutes.Maybe they’d signalled 4 and then we have the crap in the corner of ellerslie road.
The refs used to signal with their fingers,but now they have mics to let each other know. | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 15:26 - Dec 22 with 2571 views | BrianMcCarthy |
I think that’s fair.
Though it might not have got a call. Either way, it was a mistake by us after looking safe enough. | |
| |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 15:29 - Dec 22 with 2562 views | TripleR |
The board def had 4 on it, the screens above the goals had 5. | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 15:54 - Dec 22 with 2523 views | 1MoreBrightonR |
From block c south Africa road, we all 100% said the 4th official held up a board with 5 mins on it! It's all facts and alternative facts on this board ;) | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 16:11 - Dec 22 with 2485 views | LongsufferingR |
The board said 5 | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 19:13 - Dec 22 with 2232 views | Northernr |
Board definitely said five, announcement was wrong.
What I think probably happened is they were going to add four on, and communicated that to the fourth official, which Morrissey will have heard down on the touchline and got ready to announce, then as we said there was the ball chucking incident and the referee last second added another minute for it. Board definitely said five. | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 09:09 - Dec 23 with 1737 views | francisbowles |
So the ball chucking incident which wasted, what 20 seconds, probably facilitated us dropping two points.
Very bright, hope somebody has a word from the club. | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 13:07 - Dec 23 with 1415 views | PinnerPaul |
I thought the ball chucking came after 90'?
More likely the extra minute was for the Hughill 'penalty' and 'head injury' both of which were non existent! | | | |
| Thoroughly unprofessional on 18:27 - Dec 23 with 1186 views | dachiltern |
4 or 5 minutes, what difference does it make. If Eze had taken the ball in the corner and not taken a shot which was comfortably saved, if the ball chucking hadn’t occurred, if my aunt had balls she would be my uncle, if, if, if. Who cares? Quite simply we missed a clearance that 99 out 100 would have been cleared and they scored. It happens, move on. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
