Poll, a disgrace

[Huntley & Palmer]

He did have a shocker, he missed Sonko's blatant foul on the Blackburn player that should have resulted in a penalty for them

[West Stand Man]

No, Poll had a shocker today. He thinks he is the star and not the players and deliberatley courts controversy with some his decisions, which are purely attention seeking vehicles.

We lost to a better team on the day, but Mr Poll was hopeless. Some of his decisions were simply baffling, not to mention just plain wrong.

care to back that up with fact?

If you went to the match you'd know.

I did go to the match and I can't agree with you. The first bit is right, we lost to a better team on the day - but this endless and boring attack on Graham Poll is pointless. He did fine and applied the laws fairly, as he saw them.

I am as disappointed as the next man that we lost, but lets not turn our disappointment on the referee.

So maybe you would like to back up your accusation with fact, as requested?

[lozz2601]

He gave all decisions our way in first half, all decisions theirs in the second. At least that's what it looked like.
Shocker that he missed the penalty, though! (Not complaining!)

[Tony Le Mesmer]

All this bitching about Ref's pisses me off.

Anyone on here tried reffing a match? Or want to become a Ref for that matter?

Whatever, you think of them, the Ref's we get this season are the best there are. Well, bar Urriah Rennie. He's just there to keep the PC bregade happy.

[Muskrat]

No, Poll had a shocker today. He thinks he is the star and not the players and deliberatley courts controversy with some his decisions, which are purely attention seeking vehicles.

We lost to a better team on the day, but Mr Poll was hopeless. Some of his decisions were simply baffling, not to mention just plain wrong.

care to back that up with fact?

If you went to the match you'd know.

I did go to the match and I can't agree with you. The first bit is right, we lost to a better team on the day - but this endless and boring attack on Graham Poll is pointless. He did fine and applied the laws fairly, as he saw them.

I am as disappointed as the next man that we lost, but lets not turn our disappointment on the referee.

So maybe you would like to back up your accusation with fact, as requested?

OK, seems little point though as most have already been mentioned, and selectively ignored by some posters, but here are a few low lights:

Sonko's challenge, penalty not given - wrong.

Sidwell brought down through the middle - free kick given to Blackburn - wrong.

Hunt going through the middle, crowded out, fouled and brought down. No free kick given - wrong.

High kick from one of their players on Seol - free kick not given (might have even been given their way, can't remember) - anyway, wrong.

Many others that don't immediately spring to mind as they were not as blatently obvious as those above. Suffice to say that I was constantly shaking my head as he continually got things wrong.

And if anybody is wondering why I'm not mentioning the offside "goals", it's because they were ruled out on the linesmans advise, not directly by the referee.

I stand by what I say he had a shocker, but that's not why Reading lost and I am not trying to blame him for the defeat.

[John Madejski's Wallet]

AP, H&P & Muskrat:

Am I missing something when you talk about Sonko blatantly giving away a penalty??

It was a disgraceful dive by Macarthy

(although admittedly at the time I thought it looked a blatant pen.....but then that's why i'm a fan and not a ref. Good decision by Poll)

[AthleticoSpizz]

No, Poll had a shocker today. He thinks he is the star and not the players and deliberatley courts controversy with some his decisions, which are purely attention seeking vehicles.

We lost to a better team on the day, but Mr Poll was hopeless. Some of his decisions were simply baffling, not to mention just plain wrong.

care to back that up with fact?

If you went to the match you'd know.

I did go to the match and I can't agree with you. The first bit is right, we lost to a better team on the day - but this endless and boring attack on Graham Poll is pointless. He did fine and applied the laws fairly, as he saw them.

I am as disappointed as the next man that we lost, but lets not turn our disappointment on the referee.

So maybe you would like to back up your accusation with fact, as requested?

OK, seems little point though as most have already been mentioned, and selectively ignored by some posters, but here are a few low lights:

Sonko's challenge, penalty not given - wrong. correct, view from the N stand...penalty

Sidwell brought down through the middle - free kick given to Blackburn - wrong. missed that one

Hunt going through the middle, crowded out, fouled and brought down. No free kick given - wrong.correct, he was sandwichedl

High kick from one of their players on Seol - free kick not given (might have even been given their way, can't remember) - anyway, wrong.plenty of those challenges

Many others that don't immediately spring to mind as they were not as blatently obvious as those above. Suffice to say that I was constantly shaking my head as he continually got things wrong.

And if anybody is wondering why I'm not mentioning the offside "goals", it's because they were ruled out on the linesmans advise, not directly by the referee.

I stand by what I say he had a shocker, but that's not why Reading lost and I am not trying to blame him for the defeat.

All refs make dozens of wrong calls each game.

Like watching our fringe players f2ck up, it is all very noticeable (you consciensely focus on them)...........whilst not contesting your selections.......there was another 85 minutes of the game which he did not deserve your scorn.

[Harold]

Poll is just annoying because he thrives to be the centre on attention. He does make his fair share of woeful decisions too, but then do most refs.

Roger Milford was the best ref - bring him back.

[West Stand Man]

Muskrat, have you seen a replay of the Sonko incident with McCarthy. It was neither a dive nor was it a penalty. It was a good honest accident that involved one player falling forwards.

As to the other 'incidents' that you refer to, Poll was well up with play and a hell of a lot closer to them that you or me. I have a strong suspicion that he knows and understands the laws better than either of us. So, when it comes to deciding who was most probably right in his judgement who do you think I'll go with?

It is so easy to criticise the referee when you are not in extra-sensorial contact with him and have no idea what he has considered in making his call.

Oh and while I am at it, he disallowed the goal on the advice of his assistant. We advise people by giving them advice. See the subtle difference!

[Tony Le Mesmer]

Poll is just annoying because he thrives to be the centre on attention. He does make his fair share of woeful decisions too, but then do most refs.

Roger Milford was the best ref - bring him back.

Apart from the 91 Cup final of course. "Alright Gazza, calm down. I'll let you off that chest high tackle with just a warning"

[bcubed]

Muskrat, have you seen a replay of the Sonko incident with McCarthy. It was neither a dive nor was it a penalty. It was a good honest accident that involved one player falling forwards.

As to the other 'incidents' that you refer to, Poll was well up with play and a hell of a lot closer to them that you or me. I have a strong suspicion that he knows and understands the laws better than either of us. So, when it comes to deciding who was most probably right in his judgement who do you think I'll go with?

It is so easy to criticise the referee when you are not in extra-sensorial contact with him and have no idea what he has considered in making his call.

Oh and while I am at it, he disallowed the goal on the advice of his assistant. We advise people by giving them advice. See the subtle difference!

I don't agree with the general criticism of Poll but that was a dive! And a pathetic one at that

[hoopy]

The dive was an absolute joke, that was no accident ffs. McCarthy should have had his second booking for his celebration not his first.

[West Stand Man]

Anyone with more than half a brain who has seen the incident on TV will see that there was contact between Sonko's foot and McCarthy's that resulted in McCarthy's ankles clashing. McCarthy may well have accentuated the fall, but to call it a dive is laughable. It was accidental contact and that is that, no pen, no dive.

[Muskrat]

Oh and while I am at it, he disallowed the goal on the advice of his assistant. We advise people by giving them advice. See the subtle difference! [/quote]

Yes you should be embarrased about pointing out that minor lapse of conentratation in grammer. I'm sure my "A" level English tutor (from many years ago) would also have picked me up on it.

Anyway well done for top pedantry(s)?

[Platypuss]

Anyone with more than half a brain who has seen the incident on TV will see that there was contact between Sonko's foot and McCarthy's that resulted in McCarthy's ankles clashing. McCarthy may well have accentuated the fall, but to call it a dive is laughable. It was accidental contact and that is that, no pen, no dive.

You might have had a point were it not for the amount of time that elapsed between the slight contact and the "fall".

It was a dive.

[Rhys The Royal]

I've got no complaints with Poll, so yes, it is you.

And why the hell didn't he book the Blackburn player for diving after Sonko fell over behind him in the penalty area ?!

because he didn't dive - he was brought down, but only 'cos Sonks fell and clipped him -0 no intent, no penalty, no dive.

Are you joking?

Have you seen the replays?

Was it not blatently obvious that he dived?

[Dirk Gently]

Are you joking?

Have you seen the replays?

Was it not blatently obvious that he dived?

And haven't you read my reply from earlier?

I've got no complaints with Poll, so yes, it is you.

And why the hell didn't he book the Blackburn player for diving after Sonko fell over behind him in the penalty area ?!

because he didn't dive - he was brought down, but only 'cos Sonks fell and clipped him - no intent, no penalty, no dive.

Now I've seen it in slow motion I'll take that back - it was a clear dive, but it didn't look like it yesterday in real time and from the angle I swa it at - which was more or less the same anagle the GP had.

Interestingly, if he had been booked for that, and then he'd still thrown the ball to the lino after scoring, then he'd have been off and the end result could have been very different!

[SpaceCruiser]

Sonko's challenge, penalty not given - wrong.

What challenge? I'm scratching my head in puzzlement. Sonko fell over and McCarthy, with eyes in the back of his head, decided to throw himself to the floor. He even made a grab for the ball as if expecting a penalty decision! The most blatant dive you will ever see and should have a been given a yellow card.

[biscuitsrus]

Sonko's challenge, penalty not given - wrong.

What challenge? I'm scratching my head in puzzlement. Sonko fell over and McCarthy, with eyes in the back of his head, decided to throw himself to the floor. He even made a grab for the ball as if expecting a penalty decision! The most blatant dive you will ever see and should have a been given a yellow card.

Agree but yellow card for the dive and another yellow for the deliberate hand ball, therefore the cheat should have been off!!

OK thats pushing it!

[Wycombe Royal]

So even if didn't dive, as some claim, why did he catch the ball as he went down and claim a penalty? That in my book still warrants a yellow card as he was still trying to con the referee.