Neil Warnock & The Phantom Goal

Ian

Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. BEETROOT says:

    The Ipswich connection probably stems back to a league game at Chelsea circa 1970 (Chelsea 2 v Ipswich 1). Chelsea won with a “goal” which hit the side netting but didn’t enter the goal but was given nevertheless.
    I believe the referee was Roy Capey. Effectively this “squares up” the Palace dis-allowed goal !!

  2. Wurzel says:

    There must be at least half a dozen City defenders with an unobstructed view who KNOW that was a goal. They should have pointed it out to the ref or allowed Palace a “walk-in”. After all this isn’t getting away with a dodgy offside or a sneaky handball on the blind side, it was a goal, fact.
    Having said that, anything that sets Warnock off on one is worth it for entertainment value alone

  3. Alan says:

    The missing piece in all of the coverage of this is: what signals did the linesman and referee give at the time, and how was the match restarted? I’ve still not seen this in any of the replays and analysis on TV, and we’re left to guess and read between the lines of the assessors report as to why the referee didn’t award the goal. If he thought it hit the post he wouldn’t restart with a goal kick or a free kick, and if he saw a foul he’d signal such and restart with a free. The game did restart – but how?

    In the Paddy Connolly example, if I remember rightly the ref didn’t give a penalty for handball when the defender picked up the ball! That’s a bigger error in my mind than confusing the stanchion and crossbar. Mistakes will always happen, and referees will always miss things from time to time. We need to just accept that, and not turn this into a witch hunt. It looks like the referee made a howler on Saturday, but there’s a big difference between missing the fact that the ball was in the back of the net and awarding a free kick for a foul that never was.

  4. Pete says:

    Everyone seems to have forgotten the build-up to the goal, which has great cosmotheological significance in the debate. The only possible conclusion is that God clearly hates route one.

  5. Luke Rowe says:

    The beautiful game, this is what it’s aboot.. It aint aint about winning 4-0 with Nicky Maynard going past 10 players.

    Its about beating a Warnock team, and not deserving it, and watching him cry, and Simon Jordan winge, and waving an unfair three points at them, and then watching the ultimate revenge they will gain in the play-offs.. and having to stand up and take it. And then say..

    We love you Neil Warnock, we will miss you when you are gone….. (hope it aint for a while)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>