Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2015 19:04:32 GMT
Well we can agree on everything except the red car for Weir, differing opinions but that's football ! Having looked again I think it was Joachim with the flick on for Naylor's goal but not 100% sure.
|
|
|
Post by NobodyGood on Oct 25, 2015 20:40:25 GMT
I had a good view from my position on the popside not far from you peacock, I could see Robbie's studs as he challenged and immediately thought he was off, the film footage doesn't look nearly as bad though. Whatever else can be said the ref(who was poor throughout) had only had a split second to make the decision. Weir was reckless and it all came down to him trying to overplay the ball when the simple option was available. He is the one who will be suspended now though but it will give another player chance to shine, most likely to be Butcher I would think. It happened right in front of us, we had a perfect view. Didn't think it was a red then (but wasn't shocked to see the red come out) and still don't. I agree, it was definitely reckless play which is a caution. But Jimmy has said he doesn't have a problem with it. Naylor and Butcher will have to be careful or they will be on a suspension. O'Connor can play there as well. The best thing about yesterday was we scored 2 goals and got another clean sheet. They will, hopefully, be told to get a YC next week.
It would then be served in FA Cup round 1.
|
|
|
Post by NobodyGood on Oct 25, 2015 20:41:06 GMT
Well we can agree on everything except the red car for Weir, differing opinions but that's football ! Having looked again I think it was Joachim with the flick on for Naylor's goal but not 100% sure. I think it was Joachim too.
Our camera is quite poor at tracking movement, would be nice to have a slow-mo replay of the goals for such issues!
|
|
|
Post by insideleft on Oct 26, 2015 8:40:17 GMT
The Port Vale sending off was ridiculous. The lad who went over didn't appeal, he just quickly tried to get up and carry on with play. He just lost his balance or stumbled. A really poor decision. As for Weir I'm afraid you can't tackle like that in today's game, it was reckless. A worthy win all the same.
|
|
|
Post by BournemouthBrewer on Oct 26, 2015 9:45:06 GMT
I wasn't at the game but from seeing the video highlights, their red card i felt was very harsh, The lad goes down but is straight back to his feet and never once appeals for the penalty which you can clearly see him trying to tell the ref the same thing. I think Weir's one was also a red. He is off the ground going into the challenge although the contact looks like it is fair the follow through from him also makes it look a lot worse. A needless challenge but another 3 points, another clean sheet and back to winning ways! COYB!
|
|
|
Post by claymillman on Oct 26, 2015 9:55:29 GMT
A reckless tackle is a red card. It wasn't malicious, he was simply trying to rectify the too heavy a touch he had made, but it led to a reckless challenge. Even if he had missed the player, (say he anticipated the challenge and jumped clear), it can still be a reckless tackle. JFH has no complaint, and if the tackle had been against Robbie we would have certainly been calling for a red card. Just accept Peacock that many of us disagree with you on this point and move on. Don't milk it to death please.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2015 9:58:48 GMT
Well we can agree on everything except the red car for Weir, differing opinions but that's football ! Having looked again I think it was Joachim with the flick on for Naylor's goal but not 100% sure. I think it was Joachim too.
Our camera is quite poor at tracking movement, would be nice to have a slow-mo replay of the goals for such issues!
Reported in todays BM as SCS having the flick on.
|
|
scoot
Schoolboy Papers
Posts: 55
|
Post by scoot on Oct 26, 2015 10:02:19 GMT
I thought the ref got both red cards right. From the highlights the Port Vale striker clearly takes a dive and then either realises how embarrassing his attempt was or that he was on a booking he jumps up. He still dived. Yellow cards are given for diving, not for appealing after a dive. You can see the guilty look on his face after too. Weir's tackle is a definite red. Really poor challenge trying to make amends after losing it trying to needlessly play his way out of trouble. Jimmy certainly has no arguments about it. Strange thing is it probably did help us because Vale suddenly thought they could get a win out of it and opened up a bit more for us. Going to miss him while he is suspended though. Our player of the season so far in my opinion.
As for the flick for Naylors goal, Naylor has said it was Shane who headed it on in the mail.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2015 10:15:57 GMT
A reckless tackle is a red card. It wasn't malicious, he was simply trying to rectify the too heavy a touch he had made, but it led to a reckless challenge. Even if he had missed the player, (say he anticipated the challenge and jumped clear), it can still be a reckless tackle. JFH has no complaint, and if the tackle had been against Robbie we would have certainly been calling for a red card. Just accept Peacock that many of us disagree with you on this point and move on. Don't milk it to death please. Not necessarily, it comes down to "In the opinion of the referee". Some referees would report it as C1-RP as per the image Looking back (which the ref cannot do as he has a split second to decide, although he can and will add comments in his report as to the circumstance)contact was minimal, the player wasn't even treated he got up and carried on. As has been stated by a few on here, it looked worse than it was. Jimmy isn't appealing though so it is a suspension. Yes, several will have to accept that several have a different opinion. So we move on.
|
|
|
Post by BournemouthBrewer on Oct 26, 2015 10:58:18 GMT
As a ref myself i would imagine he was sent off for serious foul play for using excessive force but at the end of the day like was said about by peacock, people will have a different decision on it and that is the beauty of it, the ref only gets that split moment to make the decision and to many it will seem like the right on by the letter of the law.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2015 16:27:35 GMT
I think the definition of serous foil play sums the tackle up perfectly.
Shame for Robbie as he had been having his best season for us IMHO.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2015 17:26:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by BournemouthBrewer on Oct 27, 2015 9:25:38 GMT
This is brilliant, can't go making a tackle like that in the modern game... poor bbq sauce.
|
|
|
Post by brewersinramland on Oct 27, 2015 12:46:26 GMT
This is brilliant, can't go making a tackle like that in the modern game... poor bbq sauce. What with Funky's concerns about Serious Foil Play and clips of sauce bottles being tackled...is this forum in danger of stirring up trouble and every player getting grilled about their performance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2015 17:58:13 GMT
Confirmed, Robbie suspended for 3 games. But we already knew that... ... Karl Ikpeazu got 1 game??? Should have sent off for the elbow = 3 games.
|
|
|
Post by BournemouthBrewer on Oct 29, 2015 9:57:02 GMT
As far as i am aware 2 yellow cards is always a 1 game suspension unless it has happened already for that player in the season (i may be wrong) but yes peacockbrewer he should of gone for the initial elbow anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 11:15:11 GMT
Yeah, 2 cautions in a game is one game. In the League five accumulated before Nov.30th is one game ban (2 in a game = red do not count in this total). If a player accumulates 10 cautions before the second Sunday in April they get a 1 match ban (providing they did not get a ban for 5 before Nov.30th) and (again 2 in a game = red does not count in this total). If a player who has served a 1 match ban for 5 before Nov.30th accumulates a further 5 (again 2 in a game = red does not count in this total) by the second Sunday in April they will get a 2 match ban.
If their 10th or second 5th card (if that makes sense) is after the second Sunday in April they will be “Severely Censured and Warned as to his future Conduct”....That's the strange one?
BTW, Ikpeazu is a dirty bugger. One stat site has him this season at 19 (15+4) appearances, 55 (44+11) fouls, 5 (3+2) yellow and 1 red. (Though Vales BBC page show him with 2 league yellows). He's either dirty or awfully clumsy.
|
|
|
Post by BournemouthBrewer on Oct 29, 2015 11:50:45 GMT
Why can't they just make it simple!
I went on the Vale forum and there wasn't much good to be said about Ikpeazu, most saying he is just clumsy and lazy and has a bit of an attitude about him.
|
|
|
Post by swaddy Dave on Oct 29, 2015 12:23:29 GMT
Why can't they just make it simple! I went on the Vale forum and there wasn't much good to be said about Ikpeazu, most saying he is just clumsy and lazy and has a bit of an attitude about him. Slow as well, I'm pushing 55 and I reckon I could give him a decent race, "over a very short distance" .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2015 13:54:29 GMT
This is what a straight red for serious foul play looks like.... I won't be surprised if Phil is out of action for a bit. .... This doesn't IMO Attachments:
|
|