• All - as you will understand, the forum is exceptionally busy at this time. The admins and moderators simply don't have time to read every post in every thread. Could you PLEASE use the "Report" option below a post to flag any content that you feel we need to be aware of. We'll review everything reported as a priority and deal with it accordingly. Thank you.

Snatchday 1: Nottingham Forest Vs the PGMOL

Otis Redding

Otis Redding

Try A Little Tenderness
Strummer said:
If the PGMOL won’t release the audio publicly, Forest should ask for a written transcript, then take a leaf out of the BBC from the 1980s/90s when the government banned Sinn Fein MPs Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness from being interviewed on the telly, the Beeb decided to show the footage, but have actors over-dub the voices, and there was nothing the government could do about that.

Forest could spice it up a bit by getting some celebs in to do the voiceovers.
Click to expand...
As we're evidently displaying Trump-like behaviour according to the Daily Torygraph, we should ask comedian/impressionist/Forest fan, Matt Forde, to do it in his Spitting Image Trump voice.
 
Last edited:
Red Echo

Red Echo

Youth Team
dr_horse said:
"Today, Forest are not merely demanding unrealistic perfection from officials, but impugning the integrity of a VAR for allegedly supporting a rival. "

Is it unrealistic perfection we're demanding? This clown hasn't done his research or is on the payroll.

Sent from my M2101K6G using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
From the chief sports writer, no less.

'Ah yes, I'll handle this one. No, no, I insist.'
 
Redemption

Redemption

Chief Eye Roller
Parliament doesn't have to discuss anything if your petition is not something that's in the government's remit. 100k signatures means only that it reaches the threshold for consideration.

If you want it raised in Parliament, pester a local MP to raise it during PMQs, which takes place on a Weds.
 
GOBIAS

GOBIAS

Ian Bowyer
Redemption said:
Parliament doesn't have to discuss anything if your petition is not something that's in the government's remit. 100k signatures means only that it reaches the threshold for consideration.

If you want it raised in Parliament, pester a local MP to raise it during PMQs, which takes place on a Weds.
Click to expand...
Or pay an mp to lobby for your case!!
 
chaospunx

chaospunx

Viv Anderson
Redemption said:
Parliament doesn't have to discuss anything if your petition is not something that's in the government's remit. 100k signatures means only that it reaches the threshold for consideration.

If you want it raised in Parliament, pester a local MP to raise it during PMQs, which takes place on a Weds.
Click to expand...
f*** I've never even voted let alone pester one 🤣🤣
 
Notcher

Notcher

Stuart Pearce
eyupmeduck said:
I saw it being posted by the mail.

I also saw in the reverse fixture Yates get assaulted in the box by Doucoure and get nothing either so against us its very much Evarton. Lucky so and sos.
22b6fcebeee1343059f6215c92dfb96b.jpg


Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Something isn't adding up here. I'll have to watch it back but I'm almost certain they said check had been cleared. This is even fishier and sounds more like covering the fact that it was checked and it's not going to sound good therefore easier to say it wasn't.
 
Lefkasman

Lefkasman

Ian Bowyer
Redemption said:
Parliament doesn't have to discuss anything if your petition is not something that's in the government's remit. 100k signatures means only that it reaches the threshold for consideration.

If you want it raised in Parliament, pester a local MP to raise it during PMQs, which takes place on a Weds.
Click to expand...
I am not asking 30p for a favour. No feckin way!

Sent from my 23124RA7EO using Tapatalk
 
Gyros Peter

Gyros Peter

Sauce salad?
Notcher said:
Something isn't adding up here. I'll have to watch it back but I'm almost certain they said check had been cleared. This is even fishier and sounds more like covering the fact that it was checked and it's not going to sound good therefore easier to say it wasn't.
Click to expand...
The commentary I had on said the check had been completed. I wasn't watching on sky so is that two broadcasters saying there was a var check but the pgmol saying otherwise?
 
mister

mister

First Team Squad
YouReds43 said:
So they are saying Attwell chose not to review the 3rd Pen but I am sure the commentators said they checked it - something isn't adding up
Click to expand...
Was watching from abroad (ahem) and I'm sure the commentator said VAR reported something along the lines of 'not unusual contact' / 'normal amount of physical contact' for the third penalty claim when dismissing it.
 
M

'mist rollin in'

First Team Squad
My initial view on the first tweet immediately after the match was one of embarrassment and then I thought the two that followed were a lot more professional. However, my mood is shifting on that first tweet and I actually don't think its too bad. The club never mentions the word 'corrupt', it's a statement of fact that "VAR is a Luton fan". All we've done is imply that there is bias; it only gets blown out of proportion when the likes of Carragher and Neville start using fake outrage, the levels of hypocrisy are mind-boggling.

We were approaching the Man City game with the season card debacle firmly in our minds and whilst that is still an issue, I'm absolutely loving this siege mentality. It's also surprised me that an awful lot of clubs have backed Forest, apart from the odd Derby fan. For the next 4 games, we've got to fully get behind the team and have a complete "F**K YOU" attitude.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom