|
Post by cobhamstokey on Mar 1, 2015 9:50:57 GMT
My guess (and that is all it is a guess) is that he will be out for two or three games at the most. I suspect Hughes may have "laid it on a bit" last night because a) he was angry and b) he wants the FA panel to review the incident. Let's hope so with the cup weekend off it should give our players an additional 10 days after Everton.
|
|
puzo
Academy Starlet
Posts: 126
|
Post by puzo on Mar 1, 2015 9:51:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Mar 1, 2015 9:52:07 GMT
You don't recover in 2 weeks after that. Horrific.
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on Mar 1, 2015 9:53:16 GMT
Looks nasty! However he did dive in 2 footed earlier in the game.
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on Mar 1, 2015 9:55:20 GMT
From where I was sitting you saw him bend down a minute or so after and put his hand on the back of his leg, and his hand was bright red when he took it off.
|
|
|
Post by Silkystoke on Mar 1, 2015 9:59:23 GMT
Fuckin awful hang your head in shame Fig....!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Mar 1, 2015 10:01:05 GMT
Some utterly mid boggling stupid logic on here starts by Johan cruyffs dreadlocked imbecile of a former son in law .
However Every cloud ive just shot my next door neighbour and it's fine because he shouted at my dog last night for barking .if this was a. Adam tackle he would be banned for at least 4 games let's see if both figuro and jedenac get minimum 3 match bans before I worry about plod paying me a visit
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Mar 1, 2015 10:01:47 GMT
Looks nasty! However he did dive in 2 footed earlier in the game. Did he balls. Left his foot in a bit but 'dive in two footed'? Never.
|
|
|
Post by wearestoke80 on Mar 1, 2015 10:08:11 GMT
Should get a ban
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Mar 1, 2015 10:17:28 GMT
Looks nasty! However he did dive in 2 footed earlier in the game. So he deserved it then?
|
|
|
Post by hartzchoco on Mar 1, 2015 10:18:24 GMT
How the hell did he stay on the pitch? And how did that require only 10 stitches? Damn that looks nasty. Total fucking respect for him not coming straight off.
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on Mar 1, 2015 10:26:34 GMT
Looks nasty! However he did dive in 2 footed earlier in the game. So he deserved it then? Please tell me where I said he deserved it? Just saying it looked like he dived in 2 footed on meyler (I think)
|
|
|
Post by Roy Cropper on Mar 1, 2015 10:41:17 GMT
Jesus wept.
|
|
|
Post by torquaypotter on Mar 1, 2015 10:42:43 GMT
Just seen the picture of the tackle yesterday what a mess and the player was not even spoken to .If that had been a stoke tackle it would have been all over the papers this morning
|
|
|
Post by PerCyfilth ....Captains Log on Mar 1, 2015 10:46:21 GMT
It is in the paper.....
|
|
|
Post by potternation on Mar 1, 2015 10:46:42 GMT
Looks nasty! However he did dive in 2 footed earlier in the game. Dived in!? He went in for a 50/50 ball n stayed on his feet. If anyone dived in it was the other guy. what do you want him to do? Just give up on it n let the opposition have the ball
|
|
|
Post by binthelplates on Mar 1, 2015 10:46:59 GMT
Another reason why boots with blades should be banned. Horrific.
|
|
|
Post by torquaypotter on Mar 1, 2015 10:48:54 GMT
My point was if a stoke player had tackled like that the press would have made a meal of it
|
|
|
Post by pulismaskreplica on Mar 1, 2015 10:54:00 GMT
Looks like a shark attack - awful mess
|
|
|
Post by pedro23 on Mar 1, 2015 10:57:01 GMT
So did the Ref see it or not? According to some people he deserved it for his earlier tackle on Figuerola, including Gullit on MOTD, which was not good, but you could argue at least he was making an attempt to get to the ball. Even if that's the case since when has payback gone unpunished in football. Would you say the push by Matic was deserving of a red card and this wasn't. It will probably be the usual the FA can't act because the Ref did not see it. I have been watching football for many many years, but this season the standard of refereeing has reached an all time low.
|
|
|
Post by loosestools on Mar 1, 2015 11:02:17 GMT
Yesterday Fat Head Bruce was bollocking the ref after Irelands tackle on one their players, I think he influenced him into giving daft yellow cards, he looked away when Figeroa razored Ireland leg, the mans' a twat.
|
|
|
Post by PerCyfilth ....Captains Log on Mar 1, 2015 11:02:39 GMT
My point was if a stoke player had tackled like that the press would have made a meal of it The written press, Telegraph apart, have pretty much ignored it but the TV boys are all over it. Retrospective Ban should follow but didn't help on the day as Figueroa should have gone.
|
|
|
Post by redandwhitetundra on Mar 1, 2015 11:04:49 GMT
So did the Ref see it or not? According to some people he deserved it for his earlier tackle on Figuerola, including Gullit on MOTD, which was not good, but you could argue at least he was making an attempt to get to the ball. Even if that's the case since when has payback gone unpunished in football. Would you say the push by Matic was deserving of a red card and this wasn't. It will probably be the usual the FA can't act because the Ref did not see it. I have been watching football for many many years, but this season the standard of refereeing has reached an all time low. The FA CAN act if the ref did NOT see it. If the ref writes in his report that he saw it, the FA can NOT act retrospectively. Matic deserved the red. No argument on that one. This deserves retrospective action but won't be.
|
|
|
Post by chaydlestokie on Mar 1, 2015 11:04:55 GMT
That's not a bad tackle, it's assault.
|
|
|
Post by trigger on Mar 1, 2015 11:06:15 GMT
The foul was horrendous, more concerning is the pair of shit houses who actually get paid for officiating failed/chose to ignore to carry out any action.
|
|
|
Post by pedro23 on Mar 1, 2015 11:06:24 GMT
Looks nasty! However he did dive in 2 footed earlier in the game. He didn't dive in two footed, he caught Figurola's foot going for the ball, which he didn't even get booked for. Even if he did, since when has payback gone unpunished in football. It is clear from the clips that the ball was nowhere them when he did this, a clear kick in the back of the leg, as Hughes said a career threatening tackle. Matic sent off for a push, this unpunished.
|
|
|
Post by pedro23 on Mar 1, 2015 11:09:48 GMT
So did the Ref see it or not? According to some people he deserved it for his earlier tackle on Figuerola, including Gullit on MOTD, which was not good, but you could argue at least he was making an attempt to get to the ball. Even if that's the case since when has payback gone unpunished in football. Would you say the push by Matic was deserving of a red card and this wasn't. It will probably be the usual the FA can't act because the Ref did not see it. I have been watching football for many many years, but this season the standard of refereeing has reached an all time low. The FA CAN act if the ref did NOT see it. If the ref writes in his report that he saw it, the FA can NOT act retrospectively. Matic deserved the red. No argument on that one. This deserves retrospective action but won't be. Quite right, that's what I meant to say, just so annoyed when I saw the photo of the injury. Agree nothing will happen
|
|
|
Post by redandwhitetundra on Mar 1, 2015 11:11:52 GMT
The FA CAN act if the ref did NOT see it. If the ref writes in his report that he saw it, the FA can NOT act retrospectively. Matic deserved the red. No argument on that one. This deserves retrospective action but won't be. Quite right, that's what I meant to say, just so annoyed when I saw the photo of the injury. Agree nothing will happen Just clearing it up for people who don't understand on here (wink)
|
|
|
Post by lancer on Mar 1, 2015 11:20:52 GMT
Article in Telegraph on line showing the injury. Terrible deep and long gash.
|
|
|
Post by trigger on Mar 1, 2015 11:27:31 GMT
I'm extremely confident in saying that the FA will not even consider looking at it, I'd be more inclined to believe that Ireland will he handed a retrospective 38 game ban.
Joking apart the standard of refereeing gets glaringly worse week by week.
The Players Union who get paid to represent their members seem quite forthcoming to have a say when its a club involved but I've yet to see what their stance is when their members aren't being protected by the FA's officials.
|
|