|
Post by Gary Hackett on Nov 24, 2014 15:54:19 GMT
It would be interesting to hear what Davesviews says about this.
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Nov 24, 2014 15:55:26 GMT
Excuse my ignorance - but what the hell is a WUM?? I believe it's 'Wind Up Merchant' Where've ya got to mate?.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Nov 24, 2014 16:10:46 GMT
Go get 'em Peter. This would make excellent material for John Grisham's next novel. A fight by one man against a corrupt and incompetent organisation found to be in league with the world governing body. Then a mass class action by smaller clubs and the eventual downfall of FIFA, FA, Premier League and SKY. Followed by a block buster movie starring David Jason as Peter Coates with the straight talking, no nonsense Neil Baldwin as his attorney. Rowland Atkinson would be the bumbling Greg Dyke as head of the FA and Sian Jones completes the cast as the ferocious Sentinel Newspaper reporter who exposes the media bias.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2014 16:15:59 GMT
So you think skip there is consistency in the law, in the courts, in health issues, in politics etc, etc, you must have led a very privileged life. the point is though geoff is that even if there isn't consistency shown in other aspects of everyday life, just what has that got to do with this exactly? are you basically saying that if an organisational body sets down rules for people to follow and then by their own precedents (i.e. PC saying exactly the same thing previously yet not being charged) go against their own rules then therefore we just sit back and allow that inconsistency to flow without it being challenged? "Yeah well it happens in FIFA so let's just sit back and let it happen here as well" that's REALLY helping to move the game forward isn't it! thank god you're not a campaigner for any major cause if your philosophy is simply "Fuck it, it happens in life so just accept everything that officiating bodies/governments/law courts get wrong" surely you have to accept that if they clearly say that "You are not allowed to say x, y or z" then they have to be consistent in that ruling or expose themselves as unjust and a body that cannot be taken seriously by anyone? some of us feel that if that is the case and our ruling body are unjust and cannot be taken seriously then they should and have to be challenged to ensure that they abide by the rules they insist on everyone else adhering to...if they don't then what exactly is the point in the rules if they are simply choosing as and when they can be arsed to follow the rules themselves? how can any manager or anyone involved in a club possibly know what they can or cannot say if they are constantly moving the goalposts and changing the rules (without telling anyone) as and when they see fit? those that stand idly by and just accept is or brush it off as simply "Well it happens in life" are, quite simply, spineless and worse than those who are making those decisions imo as they are the ones happy to perpetuate miscarriages of justice after miscarriages of justice and i don't know of any single football fan who would be happy to do that. IMO you're either a straight out WUM, spineless, know nothing about football and therefore not actually a football fan or a member of the FA. which one is it?
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Nov 24, 2014 16:55:42 GMT
I believe it's 'Wind Up Merchant' Where've ya got to mate?. Amsterdam Did you miss me? I'll be back on Bentilee Wednesday tho... Internet connection is a bit iffy in these parts, haven't had the 'pleasure' of reading your views yet, oddly enough there's better things to do here...
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Nov 24, 2014 17:00:23 GMT
People on here mick have been calling for consistency from referees and the F.A., in my opinion that is impossible to achieve.
For instance I saw the Moses incident against Swansea as a possible dive, as did many other people, whereas on the Oatcake most saw it as a foul.
So firstly you will never get consistency from referees because many decisions are subjective and therefore open to different interpretations.
I also did not think Monk called referees cheats but indicated Moses cheated the ref which then caused the Ref to cheat Swansea, so again a rule book cannot be applied rigidly in all cases.
Regarding Peter Coates, I'm not sure what his motives were in raising this issue publicly, but I accept he has every right to do so, however if his aim was to try and get more consistency from officials and the F.A. I think he will fail, for the reasons I have outlined above.
Finally if you think I'm a WUM then the only advice I can offer you is to ignore my posts, but on the issue of referees I think the majority of posts I have read on here are illogical and hugely biased.
If people want to try and improve the behaviour of the referees and the F.A. that is fine but lets first have an honest debate about what is wrong, rather than a debate about the interests simply of one club.
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Nov 24, 2014 17:01:41 GMT
Where've ya got to mate?. Amsterdam Did you miss me? I'll be back on Bentilee Wednesday tho... Internet connection is a bit iffy in these parts, haven't had the 'pleasure' of reading your views yet, oddly enough there's better things to do here... You'll have to go away more often when we lose at home but hopefully not too often. Edit - Nice to see that you've now got connection and replied as I wouldn't want to think that you wouldn't have replied 'or had not posted about anything' had I not asked regards yourself. Anyway, what did Rower make of that pile of shite on Saturday?. Enjoy your time there, much better having fun than trying work out what the fcuk has happened to us defensively, or even in attack one could say.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Nov 24, 2014 17:37:10 GMT
People on here mick have been calling for consistency from referees and the F.A., in my opinion that is impossible to achieve. For instance I saw the Moses incident against Swansea as a possible dive, as did many other people, whereas on the Oatcake most saw it as a foul.So firstly you will never get consistency from referees because many decisions are subjective and therefore open to different interpretations. I also did not think Monk called referees cheats but indicated Moses cheated the ref which then caused the Ref to cheat Swansea, so again a rule book cannot be applied rigidly in all cases. Regarding Peter Coates, I'm not sure what his motives were in raising this issue publicly, but I accept he has every right to do so, however if his aim was to try and get more consistency from officials and the F.A. I think he will fail, for the reasons I have outlined above. Finally if you think I'm a WUM then the only advice I can offer you is to ignore my posts, but on the issue of referees I think the majority of posts I have read on here are illogical and hugely biased. If people want to try and improve the behaviour of the referees and the F.A. that is fine but lets first have an honest debate about what is wrong, rather than a debate about the interests simply of one club. Sorry to butt in on this. Moses was clearly having his shirt tugged and photos show this therefore there can be no disputes whatsoever that it was a penalty. The issue of Moses seen to be taking a dive is a difficult one. He knew that the defender was blind siding the ref who couldn't see the offence so I don't blame him at all for "helping" to make up the refs mind by taking a fall. The cheat in this instance was the defender for trying to hold Moses back out of sight of the ref and quite rightly got his come uppance.
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Nov 24, 2014 17:46:36 GMT
People on here mick have been calling for consistency from referees and the F.A., in my opinion that is impossible to achieve. For instance I saw the Moses incident against Swansea as a possible dive, as did many other people, whereas on the Oatcake most saw it as a foul.So firstly you will never get consistency from referees because many decisions are subjective and therefore open to different interpretations. I also did not think Monk called referees cheats but indicated Moses cheated the ref which then caused the Ref to cheat Swansea, so again a rule book cannot be applied rigidly in all cases. Regarding Peter Coates, I'm not sure what his motives were in raising this issue publicly, but I accept he has every right to do so, however if his aim was to try and get more consistency from officials and the F.A. I think he will fail, for the reasons I have outlined above. Finally if you think I'm a WUM then the only advice I can offer you is to ignore my posts, but on the issue of referees I think the majority of posts I have read on here are illogical and hugely biased. If people want to try and improve the behaviour of the referees and the F.A. that is fine but lets first have an honest debate about what is wrong, rather than a debate about the interests simply of one club. Sorry to butt in on this. Moses was clearly having his shirt tugged and photos show this therefore there can be no disputes whatsoever that it was a penalty. The issue of Moses seen to be taking a dive is a difficult one. He knew that the defender was blind siding the ref who couldn't see the offence so I don't blame him at all for "helping" to make up the refs mind by taking a fall. The cheat in this instance was the defender for trying to hold Moses back out of sight of the ref and quite rightly got his come uppance. What the fcuk has come over you man - talking complete sense n all that?.
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Nov 24, 2014 17:53:29 GMT
The issue lawrie is this, the referee had a split second to make the decision, no video or photo help, just his opinion at that precise moment.
The same with the Shawcross incident, both men with their hands raised, but the Ref ruled a penalty.
There's every chance a different Referee would have given only one penalty, or possibly neither because many fouls are not clear cut and are a matter of an immediate opinion.
I therefore maintain consistency from referees is impossible and even with the help of video technology you would still have disagreements.
In Rugby Union there seems a better attitude towards referees , both from players and supporters, perhaps we could learn from them.
|
|