Player on floor in line of gk obstructing view goal should not have stood Lino and ref made a howler and Oldham fans invading pitch then need to shut their ground for fans and ban away fans
Football without away day limbs is nothing. Respect to every Oldham fan who ran on the pitch and had the time of their lives celebrating that goal, I'm sure it was an incredible adrenlin rush, something boring conservative robots like yourself will never experience.
There was only one up there that was actually interfering with play while being offside but yeah, the goal should've been disallowed for offside regardless
..its that passion that makes football the number one sport in the world,..its the tribal aspect of surviving against the odds,when it looks like all is lost and you rescue yourself from the pit of despair...the pitch invasion lasted less than 2 minutes,...let's not lose ourself in our own self importance...😊
@@gpfdem we are talking about the reaction of fans,..not the cheating of players,..with millions of pounds at stake, players cheating is to be expected,let's be honest about that..
If the NL don't take as action against Oldham then in my opinion they will not be upholding the rules. When a goal is scored a game must be restarted. If an official has ended a game on safety grounds then by definition it has been abandoned. Pitch invasion is both an offence and is condemned by every football authority. It is my opinion that if the NL do not take action against the perpetrators then they will demonstrate to the rest of the football community that they are lacking in backbone.
@gpfdem it's those same people who follow these teams around the country on a wet Tuesday evening,. ...was the game abandoned because of the two minute crowd celebration?...maybe we should ban fans cheering goals for fear of cheering being taken as laughing at a certain section of the team,crowd,club support team,...in fact let's ban clapping as it may cause someone a headache in the crowd,...let me ask you this,should transgender women be allowed to play in the women's football super league?..Yes or No?
If the NL don't take as action against Oldham then, in my opinion, they will not be not upholding the rules. When a goal is scored a game must be restarted. If an official has ended a game on safety grounds then by definition it has been abandoned. Pitch invasion is both an offence and is condemned by every football authority. If the NL do not take action against the perpetrators then in my opinion they will demonstrate to the rest of the football community that they are lacking in back bone. As previously stated by others this sets a dangerous precedent (i.e. fans deciding to run onto a pitch so that a match is not restarted). How can a reasonable person argue any other case?
@@Daniel-vb6um I can't recall a time where our fans invaded the pitch, attacked the opposing goalkeeper and had flares thrown on the pitch all when there's still a minute of stoppage time left to be played, which made the referee decide to not even play the last minute of the game and blow the full time whistle early. If we have then that would also justify some sort of punishment for us but in this case it was Oldham fans who did all this.
@robfortune9696 Chesterfield fc fan here. I was there this day....Police made an arrest after Bury goalkeeper Cameron Belford was shamefully punched by a fan who ran on the pitch at Chesterfield. The incident occurred during celebrations for one of the home team's goals, and Belford, 22, whose side won 3-2 to clinch promotion to League One, made an official complaint after the game
@@bramwell948 Hhaha bitter! I’m not even a Chesterfield fan. I’m a football fan that is still laughing at the utter embarrassing behaviour of a set of supporters who think a 1-1 Draw in August is akin to a league or promotion wining moment. Have a word with yourselves
We know! Points will hopefully be deducted. If not it sets a dangerous precedent: invade the pitch and the game will not restart. The rules are clear. When a goal is scored the match must be restarted. If the National League don't do something about it makes a mockery of the rules in place. I wish I trusted the NL to do something but sadly they always capitulate when it matters.
There was an offside player interfering with play by being up there and blocking the vision of the goalkeeper, you don't have to physically touch the ball to be offside
@robfortune9696 the chesterfield players barely appeal. They know its a goal. He isn't interfering with the play at all, your keeper just misjudged it and spilled it. Also it's a clear penalty on Fondop regardless, referee gave chesterfield absolutely everything
@@markmills5611Hypothetically, even if no one appealed for anything at all, it wouldn't change the fact that being offside and blocking the view of the goalkeeper is interfering with play. There are often times in lots of games where either people appeal and are incorrect or when people don't appeal when there actually is a foul or something that should go their way. The keeper didn't do a good job even with the interference but that doesn't change anything either. Also there wasn't a penalty at all that game and I don't even know what you're referring to, some people were saying that there should have been a foul before our corner that led to the goal but after looking back at it multiple times it's hard to say if there was any contact at all or not and if there was, there certainly wasn't enough for a foul. So far this season, the only major decision I'm unsure about that went our way was a potential penalty shout for Oxford City that wasn't given when we beat them 2-1 because I only saw one rubbish angle which I can't really determine as to whether it should've been a penalty or not but even if it was, and it meant that we would've drawn 2-2 instead of winning 2-1 (hard to say how the game would've panned out for sure but this is a basic assumption if it should've been given as a foul which I'm not sure if it should've or not as I said), this already atones for that in terms of how many points we should have since I know for sure that we should've won this with the correct decisions.
@@connorm8050 He... was? If he wasn't there then the goalkeeper would've had a perfectly clear, uninterrupted view of everything that happened in the end (or if he stayed onside originally it wouldn't have mattered), the offside player doesn't literally have to be right in front of the goalkeeper while blocking his vision completely in order for him to be interfering with play
