It will certainly help that nobody can vote past 7 tonight8% lead now. Can he hold on until 10am tomorrow?
You're definitely going to heaven then.Voted on my work PC, then voted on my phone, then switched browser on my work pc and it let me vote again, So i switched browser on my phone and accidentally voted for Jesus![]()
3 ex referees looked at that independently and all said it was a deliberate stamp by Mings. It's not bias at all.
Even if Mings didn't mean that stamp it's a red card for serious foul play anyway. It is extremely dangerous to make contact with someone's head like that.




All I can add is that it looked avoidable....he didn't make much effort to clear the player.
One of the conditions for serious foul play is endangering the safety of an opponent. If a player goes for a bouncing ball with his foot and catches an opponent in the face that's also a red card. A boot to the head can do serious damage.
(I think he did, but...) what if it was an accident? You are now saying any player making accidental contact with another player's head is a red card if it's dangerous?
Surely Tom it would have been more credible to say, "Maybe with hindsight I couldn't tell if he meant it"
Utter bollox
One of the conditions for serious foul play is endangering the safety of an opponent. If a player goes for a bouncing ball with his foot and catches an opponent in the face that's also a red card. A boot to the head can do serious damage.
One of the conditions for serious foul play is endangering the safety of an opponent. If a player goes for a bouncing ball with his foot and catches an opponent in the face that's also a red card. A boot to the head can do serious damage.
One of the conditions for serious foul play is endangering the safety of an opponent. If a player goes for a bouncing ball with his foot and catches an opponent in the face that's also a red card. A boot to the head can do serious damage.
So a player walking backwards and not seeing a player just fallen over behind him, gets a red card of he accidentally stands on his head?
Yeah. Good ref.
Alright looks like I have to state the bloody obvious. If the impact is completely unavoidable like the example you just gave then obviously it's not a red. But if contact with the head could be avoided by not going with a high boot or not standing on a player's head like Mings did having seen Zlatan on the ground before he jumped then it is a red.So a player walking backwards and not seeing a player just fallen over behind him, gets a red card of he accidentally stands on his head?
Yeah. Good ref.
So Zlatan should have had a red for the stamp, and another for the elbow?Alright looks like I have to state the bloody obvious. If the impact is completely unavoidable like the example you just gave then obviously it's not a red. But if contact with the head could be avoided by not going with a high boot or not standing on a player's head like Mings did having seen Zlatan on the ground before he jumped then it is a red.
Alright looks like I have to state the bloody obvious. If the impact is completely unavoidable like the example you just gave then obviously it's not a red. But if contact with the head could be avoided by not going with a high boot or not standing on a player's head like Mings did having seen Zlatan on the ground before he jumped then it is a red.
I just don't think you can be certain that Mings meant to do it. I say I think he did, but no way can I be sure. I am sure Zlatan elbowed him on purpose and I'm equally sure Zlatan tried to stamp on Mings.
Anyone who has played football and understands the movements would agree.
Aha, in which case you agree with Tom, as the panel only has to decide on the balance of probabilities.
But he was off balance .....
The panel - 3 ex-refs. When will they use some common sense and have a mix on the panel.