Match Thread Coventry City - Middlesbrough Match Thread - Saturday 3rd May (59 Viewers)

[steve101]

If there was a coordinated and collective blowing air, would it reach the pitch? Just thinking if a Boro player shoots and everyone blows, would it take the pace off?

 

---

[Lionelr]

Do we know if there's any updates on injuries? Am I getting a bit hopeful thinking we may see Bobby and EMC?

 

[Johhny Blue]

No their legs tangled. There was no intention. Hence no foul. FFS

Show me a law that mentions “intentional”

 

[Lamps]

Show me a law that mentions “intentional”

The difference between murder and manslaughter?

 

[Alkhen]

Do we know if there's any updates on injuries? Am I getting a bit hopeful thinking we may see Bobby and EMC?

There was a CET article with quotes from Lampard. Not sure how accurate but:


Hopeful -
MvE
Thomas
Basette
Lati

Doubtful -
EMC

 

[skybluelee]

There was a CET article with quotes from Lampard. Not sure how accurate but:


Hopeful -
MvE
Thomas
Basette
Lati

Doubtful -
EMC

New or just the rehashed one from what he said pre-Luton?

 

[Alkhen]

New or just the rehashed one from what he said pre-Luton?

Monday, so not totally up to date but post Luton:

Van Ewijk, Bassette, Thomas, Mason-Clark - Coventry City injury news

Coventry City injury news from CoventryLive as we take a look at the Sky Blues' injury list and when players are expected back as Frank Lampard prepares his players for Saturday's huge final game of the regular season against Middlesbrough

www.coventrytelegraph.net

 

[Viktor17]

Id expect Thomas, MVE and Lati to be ok

EMC - think its a pain thing, so if an injection can get him through and there is only really value in doing that if hes going to start - then so be it. Sounds like may need op perhaps in close season.

 

[fatso]

If there was a coordinated and collective blowing air, would it reach the pitch? Just thinking if a Boro player shoots and everyone blows, would it take the pace off?

Wouldn't need much pace if Collins is in goal.

 

[skyblue_55]

EMC might have been missed & more than likely, is to continue on the treatment table for & beyond Saturdays game , but I can’t really remember a season , when we have so many options , on our left hand side ?
Paterson , whether starting or as a sub , knows where the net is & his experience in games like these is priceless.
Hadji , possibly his best position is the left , but certainly needs to do more than of late .

 

[fatso]

EMC might have been missed & more than likely, is to continue on the treatment table for & beyond Saturdays game , but I can’t really remember a season , when we have so many options , on our left hand side ?
Paterson , whether starting or as a sub , knows where the net is & his experience in games like these is priceless.
Hadji , possibly his best position is the left , but certainly needs to do more than of late .

I'd sooner see Wright up front in place of the ineffective Simms and EMC or Pato on the left.
But I doubt Frank will give Pato a start at this stage of the season.

 

[ccfcricoh]

i am by no means a physio or medical person, but at the JSB day last Wednesday, EMC could barely walk - i dont think we see him again on Saturday

 

[CovValleyBoy]

Club do not know what do with Collins or Simms.

 

[CovValleyBoy]

Club do not know what do with Collins or Simms.

FACT.

 

[skybluelee]

Monday, so not totally up to date but post Luton:

Van Ewijk, Bassette, Thomas, Mason-Clark - Coventry City injury news

Coventry City injury news from CoventryLive as we take a look at the Sky Blues' injury list and when players are expected back as Frank Lampard prepares his players for Saturday's huge final game of the regular season against Middlesbrough

www.coventrytelegraph.net

Not

Not that you can tell from that website which is borderline undecipherable but I'm pretty sure those were Lampard's comments at the weekend rather than anything new?

 

[clint van damme]

i am by no means a physio or medical person, but at the JSB day last Wednesday, EMC could barely walk - i dont think we see him again on Saturday

Pissed?

 

[Nick]

Pissed?

15 fruit shoots

 

[shmmeee]

Show me a law that mentions “intentional”

The law says “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. Which do you think applies here?

Here’s the exemplification:

• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

 

[Johhny Blue]

The law says “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. Which do you think applies here?

Here’s the exemplification:

You conveniently missed two very important parts. “Trips or attempts to trip” and “in the consideration of the referee”
It was a tough call to swallow and “in the consideration” of many referees it may have gone unpunished but by the literal letter of the law it was a correct decision.

 

[shmmeee]

You conveniently missed two very important parts. “Trips or attempts to trip” and “in the consideration of the referee”
It was a tough call to swallow and “in the consideration” of many referees it may have gone unpunished but by the literal letter of the law it was a correct decision.

No you’re misreading the rule as a whole. Here it is in full;


“A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

• charges
• jumps at
• kicks or attempts to kick
• pushes
• strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
• tackles or challenges
• trips or attempts to trip

If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.

• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:

• a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
• holds an opponent
• impedes an opponent with contact
• bites or spits at someone on the team lists or a match official
• throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object

See also offences in Law 3”

Any of those offences has to be carried out in a manner that is “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. If that wasn’t the case then simply “tackles or challenges” would be a foul. One player tripping over another isn’t in and of itself a foul without carelessness recklessness or excessive force from the opponent.

 

[Johhny Blue]

No you’re misreading the rule as a whole. Here it is in full;


“A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

• charges
• jumps at
• kicks or attempts to kick
• pushes
• strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
• tackles or challenges
• trips or attempts to trip

If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.

• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:

• a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
• holds an opponent
• impedes an opponent with contact
• bites or spits at someone on the team lists or a match official
• throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object

See also offences in Law 3”

Any of those offences has to be carried out in a manner that is “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. If that wasn’t the case then simply “tackles or challenges” would be a foul. One player tripping over another isn’t in and of itself a foul without carelessness recklessness or excessive force from the opponent.

I’m not misreading anything. In the consideration of the referee it was careless and a trip.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

No you’re misreading the rule as a whole. Here it is in full;


“A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

• charges
• jumps at
• kicks or attempts to kick
• pushes
• strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
• tackles or challenges
• trips or attempts to trip

If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.

• Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
• Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
• Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:

• a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
• holds an opponent
• impedes an opponent with contact
• bites or spits at someone on the team lists or a match official
• throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object

See also offences in Law 3”

Any of those offences has to be carried out in a manner that is “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. If that wasn’t the case then simply “tackles or challenges” would be a foul. One player tripping over another isn’t in and of itself a foul without carelessness recklessness or excessive force from the opponent.

You can definitely argue it's careless and he impedes an opponent with contact.

 

[no_loyalty]

I think they need to win more than us so hopefully it means they leave massive spaces at the back.

The issue is, who is going to make the most of that and do a goal?

We have no other option than Simms up front, I just wish Lampard would get him in a room and call him a c**t, tell him the boro defender is going to knock him out, tell him the other defender is trying to follow his missus on insta and just get him to be aggressive and direct.

Failing that get Frank to fly his big mate Diego Costa over to get him fired up.

 

[clint van damme]

Failing that get Frank to fly his big mate Diego Costa over to get him fired up.

If he can get Costa over, he's starting!

 

[shmmeee]

You can definitely argue it's careless and he impedes an opponent with contact.

Impeding requires:

“Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.”

 

[Saddlebrains]

Why are you arguing over Dasilvas red?

It's happened it's done

 

[shmmeee]

Why are you arguing over Dasilvas red?

It's happened it's done

Why are you arguing over our posts? They’ve happened. They’re done.

 

[mmttww]

Why are you arguing over our posts?

It's 3D chess on here rn. Checkmate.

 

[torchomatic]

FACT.

Ooh, in capitals and everything.