Naismith 'Strike' Credited As Own Goal

Status
Not open for further replies.
If after Green saved it the defender had headed it clear Naismith wouldn't have been awarded a goal would he? Cause he didn't score one.

And he shouldn't do here cause he didn't score one here either. He missed because the keeper saved it but got unlucky when after knocking it away from goal it hit a defender and then went it.

Shots that take one deflection on the way generally get given to the attacker. Shots that get saved and then bounce in off a defender in such drastic fashion don't.
 
Serves him right for not heading it in at the near post where the biggest gap was. That'll learn him.

...disagree, thought he was right heading it back in the direction it came from, much greater chance of something happening like it did. There was a bigger gap near post but goalies will often get them.

Own goal for me, it definitely wouldn't had gone in had it not been for the defender.
 
Barkleys stood? Even though it was marginally going wide before being deflected to sneak inside the post.

Typical really, the rules of the dubious goals panel don't apply, but then, why should they - referee's are making it up weekly as well.
Think the difference is that it is difficult to tell with Barkley's whether it was going wide or not, same with Mirallas'. Think they give the benefit of the doubt to the striker in those cases. Naismith's was obviously going wide had it not smacked Onuoha in the face...
 

No goal bonus, no Scalextric for little Naisy this Christmas. Damn you Dubious Goals Committee! Damn youuuuuu!
 

So with Kevs and Naismiths either technically(Kevs) or actual, (Naismiths), both OGs, plus Ross's took a titchy deletion, (would have been in anyrate imo), were we gifted a game by QPR like, er, you know who? lol
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top