Yes, I saw that, good for Harry. I do suspect that the 2 minutes which elapsed between the foul and the card gave Nathan the time to vent his spleen at Mike Dean, which may well have tipped the balance towards a red.
That's the wrong decision and a shame, not because we would have definitely won, but to force the FA to work out what this ridiculous new rule actually means. But on the other hand it's a good pretext for us to give Redmond a game off.
I agree. I think Tom did say when they announced the rule that it is too ambiguous. It took this referee a minute to decide (and I'm sure in that time, someone could have had a word in his ear after watching a clip).
Kanes body language gave me the impression he didn't think it deserved a red card, but what he was doing should have been done by Jose as Captain, but full marks to him for defusing the situation at the time, I have more respect for him now.
That's strange, I am sure Tom was all over this thread telling us it was definitely the right decision .
Davis saying that a game so soon is what we need after the recent defeat....he's right, but a win is more important. COYR.
I think the rule does need clarification because as we saw on Wednesday there were a lot of differing opinions. It just adds more inconsistencies to refereeing. Some referees will show a red in that situation and some won't. I personally think it was a red card but somewhere down the line there will be a similar incident that is only punished by a yellow card and we'll be hacked off (myself included).
The whole point of the change was to give the ref the chance to decide on a match by match situation.....so that he didn't always have to send off a player. If you give flexibility, you can expect variation between different referees. So people moan because too many players get sent off, then moan when the rules are changed to give refs a choice. If you want certainty...you always send off a player for a foul punished with a penalty or always give just a yellow card. However, we all know that such fouls can vary in culpability....hence leaving it to the ref. There is no certainty in life...we just have to live with it.
Redmonds absence is relevant and the decision was contentious, his absence is welcomed by a small faction, that is kind of weird and isn't supporting players in my opinion. It is a game where he may have been influential, we will never know.
Fair enough, just feels like I'm still in the Spurs postmortem. Since Redmond has moved out wide and we don't necessarily play two upfront I think he has been a lot better. Tadic and Boufal either side of Long/Rodriguez may not be a bad thing. Want to see Tadic get a good run in the team again.
If Spurs can sign up and have their own referee why can't we? Who should we get that would be so biased that he will always ensure we win when he referees our games?
Rule or no rule common sense should prevail and the ref should make the decision. It was an awful sending off, yellow at best.
Can I make a plea that we conduct the continuing post mortem of the Tottenham game on the Tottenham match thread and keep this one for anticipating the thrashing of West Brom?
West Brom have been doing well of late. It sounds strange to hear that as they've lost 3 of their last 5 games, but those 3 losses were to Chelsea, united and Arsenal. They played very well in each of those games aswell. The 2 games that weren't against top 6 sides they won comfortably. I'm going for a draw for this one. Our biggest hope is that we really make the home advantage count. WBA are considerably weaker away, whilst we are much better at home.
