Formation 4-6-0

[Hove Ranger]

Nice work Nas. I was certain he didn't get it but after that clip I'm now unsure.

[QPRDave]

Wind it back Dave, course it wasn't a red card and I'm literally in love with Clint Hill so don't worry about that..... Just I reckon that's a red. IMO

Ah right ok....

[nasser95]

Hey, listen, I'm not into all of that 'get a life' ########, I'm just looking at basic facts fella. And I did watch it slowed down, as you suggested. And on the version you've posted, I still don't see how on earth you can say 100% Clint got the ball. For a start, his foot is behind the ball as the camera views it, so the only way you can possibly tell whether he touched it or not is to look at the trajectory of the ball. If you watch the trajectory of the ball, to me, it doesn't look like it changes, so as far as I'm concerned, he didn't get the ball. So please don't talk about 'validated proof' Nasser, because you don't have any, all you have is a personal opinion, same as me.

Mate, the trajectory clearly changes. Look at the pattern on the ball. This isn't about opinion, there is clear video footage showing the ball changing trajectory, proven by the fact that the pattern totally alters on that frame that clint makes contact.

[Rangers77]

Back and to the left. Back and to the left. Back and to the left......

[Itsonlyagame]

Mate, the trajectory clearly changes. Look at the pattern on the ball. This isn't about opinion, there is clear video footage showing the ball changing trajectory, proven by the fact that the pattern totally alters on that frame that clint makes contact.

I make your bang on Nasser. In that footage it's as clear as day the ball changes direction.
As for his trailing leg taking out the player afterwards, not for me.
The ref obviously saw the touch as he gave no card at all, fair play to him.

[West Acton]

I dare you to post that footage on the Wednesday website Nas you will be my hero if you do that

The title has to be 'look at this you fat dirty northern kants love from Nasser'

[nasser95]

I dare you to post that footage on the Wednesday website Nas you will be my hero if you do that

The title has to be 'look at this you fat dirty northern kants love from Nasser'

God you have no idea how much I want to do that.

[nasser95]

Right just read through their forum. A lot of them think we were booing Clint... quite hilarious.

[Itsonlyagame]

Right just read through their forum. A lot of them think we were booing Clint... quite hilarious.

Add thick to fat dirty northern Kants

[West Acton]

Add thick to fat dirty northern Kants

[jfish]

Add thick to fat dirty northern Kants

And we invaded your pitch..

[Itsonlyagame]

And we invaded your pitch..

They really don't have much going for them up there....

[dsqpr]

Right time to see. I managed to cut the footage down and slow it down first shot to 0.25 times the speed of original, then to 20% of that and then to 10% of it. You can clearly, 100% percent see in the last one that contact is made. That is absolute fact there. No parallel universe bs, no bad defending, just an incredible stretch to reach the ball and just about make enough contact to pull it away from the striker. If you are gonna first suggest that I'm wrong, make sure you have validated proof that you're right. Here's mine:

And now that you are very much wrong, I await you then going and saying something like I have no life or whatever for doing this but to be honest, I don't really care. Enjoy.

This is a great video and for me it does show that Clint clearly touched the ball. However, there seems to be a misconception on here that if you touch the ball it isn't a foul. That is not the case. If you clearly win the ball and the opponent falls over your challenge that is one thing. But when you just touch the ball and then bring the player down so that he can't run onto it, that is a foul.

The video also shows that Clint clearly brought the player down with his HAND and that is absolutely a foul and if it denied a clear scoring opportunity, which appeared to be the case, a red card.

[nasser95]

This is a great video and for me it does show that Clint clearly touched the ball. However, there seems to be a misconception on here that if you touch the ball it isn't a foul. That is not the case. If you clearly win the ball and the opponent falls over your challenge that is one thing. But when you just touch the ball and then bring the player down so that he can't run onto it, that is a foul.

The video also shows that Clint clearly brought the player down with his HAND and that is absolutely a foul and if it denied a clear scoring opportunity, which appeared to be the case, a red card.

This may be true, however the ball was travelling away from the position in which the striker was moving. This would suggest to me at least that the chance had been stopped and Hill's challenge was big enough for it to be considered a successful tackle. Hence, why I don't think the foul could be given.

[Hubble]

Mate, the trajectory clearly changes. Look at the pattern on the ball. This isn't about opinion, there is clear video footage showing the ball changing trajectory, proven by the fact that the pattern totally alters on that frame that clint makes contact.

Welcome to pedants corner everybody, where Nasser and I will continue to debate the minutiae of whether Clint Hill actually touched the ball or not until one of us retires with battle fatigue. Before that happens, I would like to say that the trajectory does NOT clearly change, far from it. I don't think it changes at all.