Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
Just been reading something on Facebook and you would think that there was a murder there last night those Norwich twats are going crazy about it.
They're wanking furiously over Kitching's assist. Just who we are mateJust been reading something on Facebook and you would think that there was a murder there last night those Norwich twats are going crazy about it.
He's not even looking at him, expected it to be must worse way everyone was going on about it. He's trying to hand him off, keep him at arms length and was just unfortunate with the contact.
I am glad the ref didn't spot it, because if he had, BTA would have been sent off and we would have gone on to lose the match.But if a head loss in this thread.
If BTA gets a ban it won’t be Norwich or Sky or Commentators or Twitter’s fault, it’ll be his own fault.
I am glad the ref didn't spot it, because if he had, BTA would have been sent off and we would have gone on to lose the match.
But under the rules that is where reckless comes in …..He's not even looking at him, expected it to be must worse way everyone was going on about it. He's trying to hand him off, keep him at arms length and was just unfortunate with the contact.
Recklessness leads to a booking, not a red.But under the rules that is where reckless comes in …..
Was just feeling a few brains needed frazzling tonight.
Recklessness leads to a booking, not a red.
That is all correct, but challenges deemed ‘reckless’ go for a caution.Red card can be given Serious Foul Play a tackle or challenge that endangers a players safety or uses excessive force.
Violent Conduct any action involving physical force that is not a challenge for the ball.
Red card can be given Serious Foul Play a tackle or challenge that endangers a players safety or uses excessive force.
Violent Conduct any action involving physical force that is not a challenge for the ball.
So he is in danger of getting a retrospective red, “challenge that endangers a players safety” and “any action involving physical force that is not a challenge for the ball.”That is all correct, but challenges deemed ‘reckless’ go for a caution.
said this all along...look at our perfectly good goal against manure, was it 4 or 5 minutes of desperation just to find a reason to let the 'big boys' through because Haji hadn't cut his toe nails that day!Suggested before, there should be a time limit on VAR decisions. 30 seconds and if you still can't decide, on field decision stands.
Clear and obvious yes, no slow motion replays, no lines drawn across the pitch and a 1 minute time limit on the decision. That seems to easy though.Agree about a time limit for VAR. In one game recently it took 8 minutes which makes a mockery of clear and obvious.
To be honest I’m in favour of putting it in the bin and just living with referees making mistakes.
Clear and obvious yes, no slow motion replays, no lines drawn across the pitch and a 1 minute time limit on the decision. That seems to easy though.
Can we wind that back a couple of years?I like the proposal around off side - if any part of the attackers body is level with the defender they are onside. Get back to scoring goals, none of this his toe was offside.
We hadn’t scored by that point?I can't remember now if the BTA incident was before or after we took the lead, but I think there's every chance that if he had been sent off we would not actually have lost the game, as we would have then set ourselves up more defensively and wouldn't have made ourselves so susceptible to Norwich's counter attacks.
Just read that link. Someone said when was the last time someone was given a retrospective ban and all I could think of was Matty Godden for his penalty dive against Fulham. Can't have been many since then.Little old Stoke having a melt down over Asanti. They really dont like us do they since we beat them in the league and they acted like theyde won the cup final beating our resrve team in the third round. Think they are all getting a bit protective over Robins thinking we treated him harshly
No. Nothing in thatIs Sakamoto at risk of one too?
It looked like a fair challenge to me too.No. Nothing in that
Just read that link. Someone said when was the last time someone was given a retrospective ban and all I could think of was Matty Godden for his penalty dive against Fulham. Can't have been many since then.
Is Sakamoto at risk of one too?
Surely that only applies if the officials saw it. Not matter how incompetent / corrupt (delete according to your preference) they are not doing something about an incident they didn't see doesn't really absolve them of blame for every other incident this season.If we get away with this there can’t be any more complaints of a refereeing conspiracy against us this season. Clear as day red and retrospective ban.
Surely that only applies if the officials saw it. Not matter how incompetent / corrupt (delete according to your preference) they are not doing something about an incident they didn't see doesn't really absolve them of blame for every other incident this season.
If Norwich have to lodge a complaint, I've no idea if they do or its a forum 'fact', for there to be consideration of a retrospective ban then its out of the officials hands.
Has he been charged? Presumably if he’s not charged in the next 45 mins he won’t be?
That may already have happened but not been announced.Has he been charged? Presumably if he’s not charged in the next 45 mins he won’t be?
Has he been charged? Presumably if he’s not charged in the next 45 mins he won’t be?
There’s usually an announcement by the FA separately isn’t there?Sounds a lot like that but the club is so closed with info these days I wouldn’t be surprised if we don’t hear until it’s announced which I’d guess must be by Friday?
There’s usually an announcement by the FA separately isn’t there?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?