ESPN FCの乗組員は、エドゥアード・メンディが箱の中にファウルを描いたことによるウェスト・ハムの目標を認めたことが正しい呼び出しだったかどうかを議論しました。チェルシーはウェストハムを2-1で破った。 espn+:http://espnplus.com/soccer/youtubeに登録する✔YouTubeでESPN FCを購読する:http://bit.ly/subscribeToespnfc

Share.

39 Comments

  1. How are some of these pundits so off the mark? Everyone watching it could see it wasn't a foul, are they forced to play devil's advocate for the Tele? Either way it's nonsense

  2. Stevie and LeBouf are so wrong and stupid, they should know as players theres 1000s of touches to goalkeepers in action wich havent and ever will be ruled as faul. And the fact is that every goalkeeper who dive jump rush against forward to ball there will be touches contacts, its impossible to avoid that. Bowen did well and jump over, didnt want hurt but lightest touch and goal ruled of even it didnt affect the situation at all. So it was ridiculous.
    When you are goalkeeper you should win the ball, not like happened this impact Mendy bottled it.

  3. So now the VAR panel have come out and said VAR was wrong and Hammers goal should have stood, can we now get an apology from this ex Liverpool sweaty sock and that French onion? They both obviously know nothing. ESPN please stick to American sports.

  4. Thank you Don. Football is still a contact sport. A little brush of Bowen’s foot on Mendy and we call that a kick. That is not a foul. Always had my misgivings about VAR but this decision is the worst ever. No foul whatsoever.

  5. Not a foul in my opinion – absolutely stole one.

    But on the flipside, we’ve seen dodgy calls all season so take what ye can get.

    Interesting counter argument – if Bowen kicks the ball past Mendy and uses that contact to go down, he’d be begging sweet Mary Jesus and Joseph for a penalty

  6. As a westham fan, it hurts to say this but Bowen fouled Mendy with his right boot using his studs. Cornet's disallowed goal was a correct decision

  7. VAR has ruined my beautiful game, the excitement has gone and everyone is waiting for two to five minutes for a decision that is in most cases the wrong one anyway…I wish we could go back to before this stupid thing was included in the game !!!!!!!

  8. It's 100% a foul, everybody hates the result of the call because it feels unfair. There's no way Mendy's saving that shot from Cornet contact or no contact, so they're arguing it's not a foul, but I can't imagine any situation where a player can make no contact with the ball and put a boot into a goalkeeper's chest (regardless of how hard they hit them) and have it not be a foul.

    That foul gets called ten times a game where one player gets there first and the other is late and makes contact. If Bowen had got there first it would've been a penalty without question regardless of if he had any chance of actually getting to the ball to score a goal after he touched it, the reverse is also a foul.

  9. As one of the CFC Fans….got to admited that's not a fault, but VAR and Reff doesn't think the same views. But please remember and keep it in your clear.mind, it is your choice to make VAR as the Asistent to minimize the errors…and if 98 % VAR done the great job, and only 2% Make a mistakes…its fair to accepted the results.

  10. Corrupt ESPN and did u use the energy to debate this during Chelsea totteham match rubbish stop this corruption and injustice.

  11. No Frank that's not how it works. You are the one who is making the claim so you have to provide the rule don't tell someone else to check it out. If you are making a truth claim then provide the rule.

  12. Okay so just because Bowen loses his balance and "accidentally" collides with Mendy it's not a foul? C'mon dude, that is a foul. Yes, it wasn't a harsh challenge on him, but to Frank Leboeuf's point at 2:17, by definition, that was a foul on Mendy.

  13. Six of one half dozen of the other. Some incidents in football and undecidable, you may as well toss a coin because people see what they want to see. If you're a Chelsea fan, coach or player, you see a foul on Mendy, if you're a West Ham fan you see an accidental contact in which the keeper was unfortunately hurt but not fouled. Mendy was not in control of the ball so according to the rules of the game some contact was allowed. But did Bowen have time to lift his trailing leg a bit higher to avoid contact? Maybe. If there hadn't been contact, would Mendy have got to his feet in time to try and stop Cornet scoring? Maybe. Undecidable.

  14. Touch is very superficial. Bowen was trying to avoid the idiot Goalkeeper of Chelsea. The goalie used the slight brush for his own benefit and acted very well. He should try such acting with Vinny Jones. Fella would have woken up in heaven. Frank Lepuff is spouting nonsense as always. Football is a contact sport. This fella probably should run commentary for chess.

  15. Bring on the clowns! Frank played at the highest level , hilariously funny listening to his lack of knowledge on the rules of the game 😂

Leave A Reply