|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 16, 2023 14:18:04 GMT
I think I've found said clownish imbecile and I'm shocked that he doesn't appear to be some little spotty child. A former employee of ours, Jon Sidaway, is stood in the middle in his header as well. twitter.com/luke__hatfieldI get what this twat is trying to do and he's succeeded because we're sat here talking about it and it's received a lot of engagement on Twitter too but fucking hell, he's crossed a line with this. It’s how Siddaway used to run ours and I fucking hate it. There's a time and place for it. And this isn't the time and place when we don't even know how bad Wilmot's injury is. If I was WBA, I'd be calling the individual into a meeting in the morning and laying down the law. They're supposed to be a serious institution, not fucking ladbible |
|
|
|
Post by roscoepcoltrane on Apr 16, 2023 14:20:46 GMT
Seriously?…..having seen this I don’t even think it was a foul To be fair, that's the worst angle. The angle from behind clearly shows that he grabs him on the collar from behind and yanks him back mid air. Like I said earlier, it's even a red in Rugby. A cowardly act We were almost dead in line and that angle does the severity of it no justice at all. It was a disgusting cowardly challenge and he should have walked. Shockingly bad refereeing. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 16, 2023 14:22:57 GMT
It’s how Siddaway used to run ours and I fucking hate it. There's a time and place for it. And this isn't the time and place when we don't even know how bad Wilmot's injury is. If I was WBA, I'd be calling the individual into a meeting in the morning and laying down the law. They're supposed to be a serious institution, not fucking ladbible It’s what they do though and their fans are loving it like ours used to when Siddaway would start a pile on. It’s pathetic but it’s egged on by the audience. It only stops if the audience stop being cunts. |
|
|
|
Post by durbanscircus on Apr 16, 2023 14:27:07 GMT
To be fair, that's the worst angle. The angle from behind clearly shows that he grabs him on the collar from behind and yanks him back mid air. Like I said earlier, it's even a red in Rugby. A cowardly act We were almost dead in line and that angle does the severity of it no justice at all. It was a disgusting cowardly challenge and he should have walked. Shockingly bad refereeing. I was in the top tier of the Franklin dead level as well- I was completely shocked and I agree that angle in the video doesn't do it justice. It was a classic Spear Tackle which in Rugby carries an immediate red card and a long ban.It was cowardly and deliberate. I hope if Wilmott has been very badly injured the club take out a civil action against West Brom and or the player |
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Apr 16, 2023 14:30:30 GMT
We were almost dead in line and that angle does the severity of it no justice at all. It was a disgusting cowardly challenge and he should have walked. Shockingly bad refereeing. I was in the top tier of the Franklin dead level as well- I was completely shocked and I agree that angle in the video doesn't do it justice. It was a classic Spear Tackle which in Rugby carries an immediate red card and a long ban.It was cowardly and deliberate. I hope if Wilmott as been very badly injured the club take out a civil action against West Brom and or the player That’s a very dangerous route you are advocating and opens up a massive can of worms Football lawsuits will be the death knell |
|
|
|
Post by durbanscircus on Apr 16, 2023 14:38:37 GMT
I was in the top tier of the Franklin dead level as well- I was completely shocked and I agree that angle in the video doesn't do it justice. It was a classic Spear Tackle which in Rugby carries an immediate red card and a long ban.It was cowardly and deliberate. I hope if Wilmott as been very badly injured the club take out a civil action against West Brom and or the player That’s a very dangerous route you are advocating and opens up a massive can of worms Football lawsuits will be the death knell I think it depends on the severity of the injury, the response of the authorities, and the behaviour of WBA. Looks like WBA have already failed the decency test with their tweet today/last night. Cant have challenges like that go unchecked otherwise the game is ruined anyway. Not that this is as important a point but that challenge destroyed the game anywat and changed its course |
|
|
|
Post by raythesailor on Apr 16, 2023 14:40:06 GMT
It’s not even debatable.
It was a disgrace of a foul that I and more importantly the Referee had a perfect view of it.
It is very easy to vilify officials which I rarely do (having spent 30 odd years doing it myself) but it was disgusting.
I spend a lot of my time watching the officials and that really was probably the worst I have ever seen including Atkinson and Co in the PL
|
|
|
|
Post by SuperRickyFuller on Apr 16, 2023 14:40:55 GMT
We were almost dead in line and that angle does the severity of it no justice at all. It was a disgusting cowardly challenge and he should have walked. Shockingly bad refereeing. I was in the top tier of the Franklin dead level as well- I was completely shocked and I agree that angle in the video doesn't do it justice. It was a classic Spear Tackle which in Rugby carries an immediate red card and a long ban.It was cowardly and deliberate. I hope if Wilmott has been very badly injured the club take out a civil action against West Brom and or the player It was nothing like a spear tackle. And civil action? That'd be the beginning of the end for not just football but sport in general. |
|
|
|
Post by durbanscircus on Apr 16, 2023 14:47:05 GMT
I was in the top tier of the Franklin dead level as well- I was completely shocked and I agree that angle in the video doesn't do it justice. It was a classic Spear Tackle which in Rugby carries an immediate red card and a long ban.It was cowardly and deliberate. I hope if Wilmott has been very badly injured the club take out a civil action against West Brom and or the player It was nothing like a spear tackle. And civil action? That'd be the beginning of the end for not just football but sport in general. Setting aside we may have different view of how you need to project someone to the floor from height when they cant defend/protect themselves to qualify as a Spear tackle - I have a question If the authorities ignore it , both the refereeing performance and the incident itself- what do you think should be done? |
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Apr 16, 2023 14:47:45 GMT
We were almost dead in line and that angle does the severity of it no justice at all. It was a disgusting cowardly challenge and he should have walked. Shockingly bad refereeing. I was in the top tier of the Franklin dead level as well- I was completely shocked and I agree that angle in the video doesn't do it justice. It was a classic Spear Tackle which in Rugby carries an immediate red card and a long ban.It was cowardly and deliberate. I hope if Wilmott has been very badly injured the club take out a civil action against West Brom and or the player If we're labelling it, then it was closer to a horse collar tackle in American Football. |
|
|
|
Post by Caerwrangonpotter on Apr 16, 2023 14:51:10 GMT
2 Questions.
1. The tweet. Can West Brom be in trouble with the EFL for the tweet as its on their official page?
2. Retrospective action for the challenge and/or the performance of the referee?
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 16, 2023 14:53:31 GMT
The tweet is what football clubs do and is encouraged by fans.
I don’t think it was a red and I don’t think any ref would have sent him off.
Not booking him though? Madness and the overall performance needs looking at. And the liner by the Sentinel Stand. He was guessing.
|
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Apr 16, 2023 15:06:28 GMT
The tweet is what football clubs do and is encouraged by fans. I don’t think it was a red and I don’t think any ref would have sent him off. Not booking him though? Madness and the overall performance needs looking at. And the liner by the Sentinel Stand. He was guessing. At the time it was written the individual will have no idea of the extent of the injury at the very very best it’s a gross misjudgment at worst it’s a incitement and escalation of I’ll feeling that’s downright irresponsible never mind lacking in any level of dignity it categorically ensures WBA v Stoke city next season will carry the venom of the Pulis games |
|
|
|
Post by SuperRickyFuller on Apr 16, 2023 15:14:44 GMT
It was nothing like a spear tackle. And civil action? That'd be the beginning of the end for not just football but sport in general. Setting aside we may have different view of how you need to project someone to the floor from height when they cant defend/protect themselves to qualify as a Spear tackle I have a question If the authorities ignore it , both the refereeing performance and the incident itself- what do you think should be done? You said "It was a classic Spear Tackle" when it isn't. A spear tackle is where a player has been tackled, then picked up and driven to the ground with force landing on their head/back of the neck or shoulders. That hasn't happened here. For me, all four officials were grossly negligent yesterday. They all saw what had happened a couple of times before Wilmot's injury and did nothing, it should've been stamped out the first time it happened with a booking. They all need re-educating and banning in the interim because they've got a duty of care to the players. That being said, players have a got a duty of care to eachother too, something that gets said regularly with sports like Rugby League/Union. If they don't show that by doing something like tackling in the air, they get punished for it and rightly so, even if there was no intent to harm a player (sometimes a player can mistime their chase down). Their player needs a retrospective 3 game ban and educating on why his actions were so dangerous. If he does it again, the ban increases to 4, and so on and so forth until he gets the message. If nothing at all is done then I genuinely don't know what road you go down to prevent things like this happening. If you go down the civil action route then imagine all the cases that would be opened? And against a number of different people/bodies? We'd be livid if Ramsey sued Shawcross years after the incident wouldn't we? Also, if any of them win, thus setting a precedent, then insurance premiums for sport would go through the roof too and that'd kill off lower league football once and for all. |
|
|
|
Post by durbanscircus on Apr 16, 2023 15:30:52 GMT
Setting aside we may have different view of how you need to project someone to the floor from height when they cant defend/protect themselves to qualify as a Spear tackle I have a question If the authorities ignore it , both the refereeing performance and the incident itself- what do you think should be done? You said "It was a classic Spear Tackle" when it isn't. A spear tackle is where a player has been tackled, then picked up and driven to the ground with force landing on their head/back of the neck or shoulders. That hasn't happened here. For me, all four officials were grossly negligent yesterday. They all saw what had happened a couple of times before Wilmot's injury and did nothing, it should've been stamped out the first time it happened with a booking. They all need re-educating and banning in the interim because they've got a duty of care to the players. That being said, players have a got a duty of care to eachother too, something that gets said regularly with sports like Rugby League/Union. If they don't show that by doing something like tackling in the air, they get punished for it and rightly so, even if there was no intent to harm a player (sometimes a player can mistime their chase down). Their player needs a retrospective 3 game ban and educating on why his actions were so dangerous. If he does it again, the ban increases to 4, and so on and so forth until he gets the message. If nothing at all is done then I genuinely don't know what road you go down to prevent things like this happening. If you go down the civil action route then imagine all the cases that would be opened? And against a number of different people/bodies? We'd be livid if Ramsey sued Shawcross years after the incident wouldn't we? Also, if any of them win, thus setting a precedent, then insurance premiums for sport would go through the roof too and that'd kill off lower league football once and for all. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 16, 2023 15:34:49 GMT
The tweet is what football clubs do and is encouraged by fans. I don’t think it was a red and I don’t think any ref would have sent him off. Not booking him though? Madness and the overall performance needs looking at. And the liner by the Sentinel Stand. He was guessing. At the time it was written the individual will have no idea of the extent of the injury at the very very best it’s a gross misjudgment at worst it’s a incitement and escalation of I’ll feeling that’s downright irresponsible never mind lacking in any level of dignity it categorically ensures WBA v Stoke city next season will carry the venom of the Pulis games They don’t give a shit about that. It got views. Their fans are loving it. Our fans would be the same. I absolutely agree with you btw but the issue is the people it’s aimed at more than anything. They all need to grow the fuck up. |
|
|
|
Post by durbanscircus on Apr 16, 2023 15:39:15 GMT
Super Rcky Fuller -I think the event was better described above as a Collar Tackle in American football which is also illegal because of the risk of spinal injury and broken back. SO I think your point about it not being a perfect spear tackle was a diversionary point to make your major argument which very reasonably sets out some of the negative impacts of going down the route of civil action. I did reflect on the Ramsey Incident and the fact that I was sat about 15-20 ft from where it happened. I saw he was clearly impeded in the challenge by his shirt being pulled. Maybe a legal challenge would have cleared Shawcross and not led to the stain on his career it became outside of North Staffordshire
Covering the more substantive point though, the football authorities wouldnt want the outcomes you set out resulting from civil action, and so would almost certainly modify how these situations are regulated in the aftermath of a case. The alternative of doing nothing feels desperate, and I as a consumer of football and fan of over 50 years would have to conclude the game has been corrupted and by cheating and money.Im not ready to accept that yet as then im finished wit it
|
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Apr 16, 2023 15:47:06 GMT
What Thomas-Asante did was a dangerous piece of play but something football collectively has been ignoring or tacitly accepting for a long time.
It’s not a “spear tackle” nor is it really a heavy yank to the ground, but it’s a horrifically timed pull on Wilmot at his maximum elevation where he cannot possibly control his landing. It’s a matter of time before something like this happened and it I’m honest I am far more angry at the referee and the EFL for consistently ignoring it than I am at Thomas-Asante as he is far from the first player to do it and I do not think there was genuine intent over and above the intent in any tackle in a fast paced game. (I appreciate others may think differently on this.)
Talks of suing are really off the mark for me, I imagine players and clubs are insured up to their eyeballs for situations like this, you would have a very hard time proving the foul was anything over and above what you would expect to see in a football game and if you set a precedent on this then the door is opened for all kinds of frivolous lawsuits. This matter should be looked at in house by the EFL moving forward and the whole issue of tackling in the air reviewed as we’ve seen for concussions and two footed tackles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2023 15:47:12 GMT
We were almost dead in line and that angle does the severity of it no justice at all. It was a disgusting cowardly challenge and he should have walked. Shockingly bad refereeing. I was in the top tier of the Franklin dead level as well- I was completely shocked and I agree that angle in the video doesn't do it justice. It was a classic Spear Tackle which in Rugby carries an immediate red card and a long ban.It was cowardly and deliberate. I hope if Wilmott has been very badly injured the club take out a civil action against West Brom and or the player I'm sorry but no matter what your view on it is there's no way on this Earth that it's a 'spear tackle'. |
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Apr 16, 2023 16:15:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Apr 16, 2023 16:29:14 GMT
The tweet is what football clubs do and is encouraged by fans. I don’t think it was a red and I don’t think any ref would have sent him off. Not booking him though? Madness and the overall performance needs looking at. And the liner by the Sentinel Stand. He was guessing. At the time it was written the individual will have no idea of the extent of the injury at the very very best it’s a gross misjudgment at worst it’s a incitement and escalation of I’ll feeling that’s downright irresponsible never mind lacking in any level of dignity it categorically ensures WBA v Stoke city next season will carry the venom of the Pulis games Being the devil's advocate it could also be something written about his general performance without really thinking. Taking his horrific foul out of the game he was very impressive and probably man of the match for me. However that just shows how much influence referees have on the outcome of a game. Our best player in the first half spends the second half in hospital while their best player who committed the foul stays on to influence the game. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 16, 2023 16:30:35 GMT
At the time it was written the individual will have no idea of the extent of the injury at the very very best it’s a gross misjudgment at worst it’s a incitement and escalation of I’ll feeling that’s downright irresponsible never mind lacking in any level of dignity it categorically ensures WBA v Stoke city next season will carry the venom of the Pulis games Being the devil's advocate it could also be something written about his general performance without really thinking. Taking his horrific foul out of the game he was very impressive and probably man of the match for me. However that just shows how much influence referees have on the outcome of a game. Our best player in the first half spends the second half in hospital while their best player who committed the foul stays on to influence the game. Was he? I thought it was a pretty shit game between two poor looking sides. |
|
|
|
Post by callas12 on Apr 16, 2023 16:48:12 GMT
The tweet is what football clubs do and is encouraged by fans. I don’t think it was a red and I don’t think any ref would have sent him off. Not booking him though? Madness and the overall performance needs looking at. And the liner by the Sentinel Stand. He was guessing. Agree with your thought process regarding a red card but I'm still convinced to this day that Ryan Shawcross was only red carded in the Ramsey incident once the ref had noted the extent of the injury to Ramseys leg, which is never the way it should be judged on. The ref had no intention of deeming it an illegal tackle when he first viewed it live at full pace. In a lot of people's eyes (even neutral fans), people weren't convinced it was even an offence in the first place, nor one that warranted a yellow card nevermind a red! Im convinced the ref judged that red card on basis of injury alone which was never right. So yesterday I get the ref not red carding purely on basis of seriousness of injury. But there was clearly a foul committed, the linesman flagged and the ref blew his whistle to signal a free kick to us. So on the basis of what he thinks he viewed, he didn't deem it serious enough to punish with a card being shown. In my view he saw it as a minor foul which he had made his mind up it didn't warrant any further punishment other than the free kick being awarded to Stoke. But in the next phase following the initial challenge he has then witnessed the extent & seriousness of Wilmots injuries but has actually not deemed further punishment necessary on this basis alone. Rightly so if that's how he initially viewed things. In reality I think that him not punishing the player at the time may result in the challenge being reviewed & he may well face a retrospective punishment. I totally get it doesn't help us now going forward as down to 10men yesterday would have really given us the advantage for the duration of yesterday's match. But if the ref didn't realise at the time of the challenge that Asante had been as sly as he had with the collar pull back whilst Wilmot was mid-air, I do get why no further action was taken yesterday. A VAR option may have well been a game changer yesterday as that may have shown how dangerous his actions were, but as it is a retrospective review and punishment is most likely the most we can now expect. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 16, 2023 16:50:25 GMT
The tweet is what football clubs do and is encouraged by fans. I don’t think it was a red and I don’t think any ref would have sent him off. Not booking him though? Madness and the overall performance needs looking at. And the liner by the Sentinel Stand. He was guessing. Agree with your thought process regarding a red card but I'm still convinced to this day that Ryan Shawcross was only red carded in the Ramsey incident once the ref had noted the extent of the injury to Ramseys leg, which is never the way it should be judged on. The ref had no intention of deeming it an illegal tackle when he first viewed it live at full pace. In a lot of people's eyes (even neutral fans), people weren't convinced it was even an offence in the first place, nor one that warranted a yellow card nevermind a red! Im convinced the ref judged that red card on basis of injury alone which was never right. So yesterday I get the ref not red carding purely on basis of seriousness of injury. But there was clearly a foul committed, the linesman flagged and the ref blew his whistle to signal a free kick to us. So on the basis of what he thinks he viewed, he didn't deem it serious enough to punish with a card being shown. In my view he saw it as a minor foul which he had made his mind up it didn't warrant any further punishment other than the free kick being awarded to Stoke. But in the next phase following the initial challenge he has then witnessed the extent & seriousness of Wilmots injuries but has actually not deemed further punishment necessary on this basis alone. In reality I think that him not punishing the player at the time may result in the challenge being reviewed & he may well face a retrospective punishment. I totally get it doesn't help us now going forward as down to 10men yesterday would have really given us the advantage for the duration of yesterday's match. But if the ref didn't realise at the time of the challenge that Asante had been as sly as he had with the collar pull back whilst Wilmot was mid-air, I do get why no further action was taken yesterday. A VAR option may have well been a game changer yesterday as that may have shown how dangerous his actions were, but as it is a retrospective review and punishment is most likely the most we can now expect. I agree he was and I don’t think that was the right decision. He should have been yellowed. I don’t think VAR changes anything in that game yesterday. |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 16, 2023 16:51:12 GMT
The tweet is what football clubs do and is encouraged by fans. I don’t think it was a red and I don’t think any ref would have sent him off. Not booking him though? Madness and the overall performance needs looking at. And the liner by the Sentinel Stand. He was guessing. Agree with your thought process regarding a red card but I'm still convinced to this day that Ryan Shawcross was only red carded in the Ramsey incident once the ref had noted the extent of the injury to Ramseys leg, which is never the way it should be judged on. The ref had no intention of deeming it an illegal tackle when he first viewed it live at full pace. In a lot of people's eyes (even neutral fans), people weren't convinced it was even an offence in the first place, nor one that warranted a yellow card nevermind a red! Im convinced the ref judged that red card on basis of injury alone which was never right. So yesterday I get the ref not red carding purely on basis of seriousness of injury. But there was clearly a foul committed, the linesman flagged and the ref blew his whistle to signal a free kick to us. So on the basis of what he thinks he viewed, he didn't deem it serious enough to punish with a card being shown. In my view he saw it as a minor foul which he had made his mind up it didn't warrant any further punishment other than the free kick being awarded to Stoke. But in the next phase following the initial challenge he has then witnessed the extent & seriousness of Wilmots injuries but has actually not deemed further punishment necessary on this basis alone. In reality I think that him not punishing the player at the time may result in the challenge being reviewed & he may well face a retrospective punishment. I totally get it doesn't help us now going forward as down to 10men yesterday would have really given us the advantage for the duration of yesterday's match. But if the ref didn't realise at the time of the challenge that Asante had been as sly as he had with the collar pull back whilst Wilmot was mid-air, I do get why no further action was taken yesterday. A VAR option may have well been a game changer yesterday as that may have shown how dangerous his actions were, but as it is a retrospective review and punishment is most likely the most we can now expect. Deliberately endangering another player is a red card offence |
|
|
|
Post by callas12 on Apr 16, 2023 16:57:21 GMT
Agree with your thought process regarding a red card but I'm still convinced to this day that Ryan Shawcross was only red carded in the Ramsey incident once the ref had noted the extent of the injury to Ramseys leg, which is never the way it should be judged on. The ref had no intention of deeming it an illegal tackle when he first viewed it live at full pace. In a lot of people's eyes (even neutral fans), people weren't convinced it was even an offence in the first place, nor one that warranted a yellow card nevermind a red! Im convinced the ref judged that red card on basis of injury alone which was never right. So yesterday I get the ref not red carding purely on basis of seriousness of injury. But there was clearly a foul committed, the linesman flagged and the ref blew his whistle to signal a free kick to us. So on the basis of what he thinks he viewed, he didn't deem it serious enough to punish with a card being shown. In my view he saw it as a minor foul which he had made his mind up it didn't warrant any further punishment other than the free kick being awarded to Stoke. But in the next phase following the initial challenge he has then witnessed the extent & seriousness of Wilmots injuries but has actually not deemed further punishment necessary on this basis alone. In reality I think that him not punishing the player at the time may result in the challenge being reviewed & he may well face a retrospective punishment. I totally get it doesn't help us now going forward as down to 10men yesterday would have really given us the advantage for the duration of yesterday's match. But if the ref didn't realise at the time of the challenge that Asante had been as sly as he had with the collar pull back whilst Wilmot was mid-air, I do get why no further action was taken yesterday. A VAR option may have well been a game changer yesterday as that may have shown how dangerous his actions were, but as it is a retrospective review and punishment is most likely the most we can now expect. Deliberately endangering another player is a red card offence For sure, but if the ref didn't see or appreciate what Asante had fully done at that point a reds never going to be given. I think the ref simply saw it as Asante and Wilmot collided mid air and coz Wilmot came off worse he simply gave a bog standard foul to us. I'm guessing/hoping the ref simply saw it as Wilmot falling awkwardly. From my vantage point in the Tile Mountain Stand I was convinced there was some kind of shift pull/tug but without the option of a replay it was definitely a foul, but not 100% a dangerous foul on first live viewing. That's the problem with yesterday. The ref was a complete knobber but giving him the benefit of the doubt for that incident, I think he purely viewed it as a foul but with a injury occuring as a result of an innocuous fall to the ground. Even folk sat near near me weren't 100% sure if it was a foul and deliberate act or an accident. Just as everyone had opinions on what part of his body was actually injured, was pure guess work. Yes In an ideal world the ref would have see the pull back and deemed it dangerous, but for whatever reason he clearly didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 16, 2023 17:01:20 GMT
Absolutely no referee sends him off there. None.
Should it be? Probably.
But it just doesn’t happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 16, 2023 17:03:03 GMT
Deliberately endangering another player is a red card offence For sure, but if the ref didn't see or appreciate what Asante had fully done at that point a reds never going to be given. I think the ref simply saw it as Asante and Wilmot collided mid air and coz Wilmot came off worse he simply gave a bog standard foul to us. I'm guessing/hoping the ref simply saw it as Wilmot falling awkwardly. From my vantage point in the Tile Mountain Stand I was convinced there was some kind of shift pull/tug but without the option of a replay it was definitely a foul, but not 100% a dangerous foul on first live viewing. That's the problem with yesterday. The ref was a complete knobber but giving him the benefit of the doubt for that incident, I think he purely viewed it as a foul but with a injury occuring as a result of an innocuous fall to the ground. Even folk sat near near me weren't 100% sure if it was a foul and deliberate act or an accident. Just as everyone had opinions on what part of his body was actually injured, was pure guess work. Yes In an ideal world the ref would have see the pull back and deemed it dangerous, but for whatever reason he clearly didn't. The ref was perfectly positioned It was the third type of foul that half Disgusting from Albion Abysmal from the ref |
|
|
|
Post by suck_the_mop. on Apr 16, 2023 17:05:38 GMT
The tweet is what football clubs do and is encouraged by fans. I don’t think it was a red and I don’t think any ref would have sent him off. Not booking him though? Madness and the overall performance needs looking at. And the liner by the Sentinel Stand. He was guessing. Agree with your thought process regarding a red card but I'm still convinced to this day that Ryan Shawcross was only red carded in the Ramsey incident once the ref had noted the extent of the injury to Ramseys leg, which is never the way it should be judged on. The ref had no intention of deeming it an illegal tackle when he first viewed it live at full pace. In a lot of people's eyes (even neutral fans), people weren't convinced it was even an offence in the first place, nor one that warranted a yellow card nevermind a red! Im convinced the ref judged that red card on basis of injury alone which was never right. So yesterday I get the ref not red carding purely on basis of seriousness of injury. But there was clearly a foul committed, the linesman flagged and the ref blew his whistle to signal a free kick to us. So on the basis of what he thinks he viewed, he didn't deem it serious enough to punish with a card being shown. In my view he saw it as a minor foul which he had made his mind up it didn't warrant any further punishment other than the free kick being awarded to Stoke. But in the next phase following the initial challenge he has then witnessed the extent & seriousness of Wilmots injuries but has actually not deemed further punishment necessary on this basis alone. Rightly so if that's how he initially viewed things. In reality I think that him not punishing the player at the time may result in the challenge being reviewed & he may well face a retrospective punishment. I totally get it doesn't help us now going forward as down to 10men yesterday would have really given us the advantage for the duration of yesterday's match. But if the ref didn't realise at the time of the challenge that Asante had been as sly as he had with the collar pull back whilst Wilmot was mid-air, I do get why no further action was taken yesterday. A VAR option may have well been a game changer yesterday as that may have shown how dangerous his actions were, but as it is a retrospective review and punishment is most likely the most we can now expect. You just know though that there will be NO retrospective punishment for the player or demotion for the referee of any kind don't we. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2023 17:08:31 GMT
This offence should be red carded always! Time to give refs some mandatory rules! You are right. But there are mandatory rules. Dangerous play is always a straight red in football, the same as rugby. He's pulled wilmot crashing to the ground, when he is mid air . He's lucky wilmot didn't break his neck. Which is why it's dangerous play in football and rugby. It's a straight red in either game. The rule , dangerous play= automatic red card is fine. It's the ref that needs changing. As pointed out repeatedly in previous posts ,the ref is dangerous and has to go . |
|
