STATBANK - Nottingham Forest 2-1 Charlton Athletic

lancashire lad

Many thanks to the 45 Lifers who gave their marks, no matter how few (marks that is) !

The goal has been given as an own goal and therefore I have given the assist to Fuller. The Football League and BBC have Hamer as receiveing a yellow card although the O.S does not, so I have given him a yellow as well.
The Palarse stats will include the new Promorelegator, so don't miss it

These stats are at: https://us.v-cdn.net/5000498/uploads/FileUpload/4f/e2bcee9d25efe7d3fb4018a7f395f7.pdf

Wheresmeticket

Thanks LL.

Oh dear.

golfaddick

I deffo saw Hamer get a yellow after their 2nd goal

I also still think its Fuller's goal..............

Addickted4life

Cheers LL.

Oggy Red

I'd also give the goal to Fuller.

Just a basic deflection off the keeper. He knew nothing of it until it deflected off him and into the net before he could react.

Plenty of shots are deflected in off defenders each week - and quite rightly they're not given as own goals.


Also, watching the video, I swear that Forest defender instinctively moved his arm before the ball struck it from Kerkar's shot - which makes it a hand to ball offence, thus a penalty should have been awarded.

indian_addick

Interesting....our worst defenders/forwards are better than our best midfielders?

In the cumulative stats for this season, top 7 includes all 4 defenders, the keeper and both strikers. Midfielders occupy places 8 through 11.
Now you know where to strengthen Mr Powell

stackitsteve

When they scored the 2nd goal Morrison and Hamer both got booked for their protests to the lino

Edit: Just seen golfaddick already confirmed the Hamer booking

harveys_gardener

Curious that kerkar's shot on target that should have been a pen scores nothing in the stats. Would it have hit his body if not his arm first?

Sonicstud85

definitely an own goal...if the keeper wasnt there it wouldnt have gone in!

oohaahmortimer

Sonicstud85 said:

definitely an own goal...if the keeper wasnt there it wouldnt have gone in!

exactly

Oggy Red

Sonicstud85 said:

definitely an own goal...if the keeper wasnt there it wouldnt have gone in!

Surely an own goal has to be qualified by a player pro-actively attempting to play the ball, rather than it advertently bouncing off him?

The last player to proactively play the ball was Fuller.

Every week in games up and down the country, shots take as they say,"wicked deflections" and the goal is awarded to the player who took the shot.

And quite rightly so.

oohaahmortimer

the shots have to be on target , if deflected in, to go down as the player who shoots thems goal

Sonicstud85

"the dubious goals panel" - i think their general rule is as oohaah says - if its not going in, they cant be credited. A rule i agree with and would mean Lee camp gets the own goal... Fuller didnt proactively mean to play it off the goalie did he?

The one thats gets me is the when stattos give a mark for shots on target when they hit the woodwork! Post and in should be on target, post and out should be off target.

dabos

Oggy Red said:

Sonicstud85 said:

definitely an own goal...if the keeper wasnt there it wouldnt have gone in!

Surely an own goal has to be qualified by a player pro-actively attempting to play the ball, rather than it advertently bouncing off him?

The last player to proactively play the ball was Fuller.

Every week in games up and down the country, shots take as they say,"wicked deflections" and the goal is awarded to the player who took the shot.

And quite rightly so.

But it's only given to the player taking the shot if, had the defender and goalkeeper not been present, the ball would've gone in the net. If the shot would've gone wide, it would've gone down as an own goal. Nothing to do with intentionally touching the ball or not.