Being a bear of little brain, like Winnie the pooh, please can someone more knowledgeable explain the difference between the handball by Nathan Dyer that was illegal and that by Gestede that wasn't. I kind of accepted the argument that the ball changed direction but the deviation in the latter was more pronounced than the former.
posted on 16/1/16
It was certainly handball for their goal and it should have been disallowed, but they were denied a clear penalty. Its our fault we didn't win that game and no one elses
posted on 16/1/16
Agreed A Foxes Voice. The handball for the Villa goal is just noise, all in all we didn't deserve to win the match and on another day could have lost. In the context of our season, today will go down as a poor result. The performance was the worry for me though.
New striker is needed to provide some fresh danger.
posted on 16/1/16
The only blame you can place on Leicester not winning that game is on us.
The ref made mistakes in both teams favour. We played appallingly. We deserved nothing from that. Lacklustre, disinterested, poor.
Well played Villa.
posted on 17/1/16
Ulloa was really poor again too.
posted on 17/1/16
We just didn't fight for it, villa did. Even at 1-0 I was annoyed and frustrated with our performance. The goal came as no surprise
If they started gestede they'd of won, he bullied us.
posted on 17/1/16
Ulloa has been dire for the most of the season so far. Just looks a lump.
A couple of new players to freshen it up would be lovely
posted on 17/1/16
The handball for our penalty was very much like the Dyer one against Spurs: Marginal either way. The handball for Gestede's goal you'd usually see given. Huth's jump in the area was possibly a foul but probably not. Huth's standing arm (the first incident) was never a penalty in a million years. His eyes are on the ball and he's raising his arm to hold his position. The fact that the Villa player chooses the battle him with him jaw rather than his own arm is irrelevant.
posted on 17/1/16
And incidentally, I can't agree with the statement "well played Villa". They were terrible. We were just terrible as well, and I'm afraid Ranieri made some bad calls yesterday.
posted on 17/1/16
On a completely separate matter (and coming from someone who had to be satisfied with 'live' updates throughout), I am appalled at a certain TV channel's lack of acceptance that an 'outsider' is at the top of the Division.
In the aftermath, Chelsea and Everton's game had the first mention, probably through a said controversy, followed by Manchester City's win and then...who gets a mention next? The team that returned to the top.
Will their attitude ever, ever change? No chance!
I don't care if it had been Stoke, Crystal Palace, West Ham or Spurs at the top, and in the absence of City I sure wish it was one of them-if they are top they should be getting first mention! Change your ways!