That Mirallas tackle

Always am, don't get me started on criminals

 

That's true but it's not what most of us are looking for. Speaking for myself I want fair punishment for a crime that went unpunished or punished too lightly, to send the right message that the game is being 'policed' [can't think of the right word] correctly.

 

The fact that he's got stud marks on his leg doesn't necessarily equate to a red card anyway though does it. You can clash with a player & break the skin without it necessarily being deemed a sending off offence.

It's easy to say it should have been red, given the benefit we've had on umpteen replays, but he saw it once, from 1 angle, his assistants obviously couldn't offer him anything conclusive, so he went with yellow........................(cause the meff of a physio gobbed of as well like )

 

you got a thing for our physio tobes

 

Maybe the game should adopt the tennis / cricket approach and offer each team three challenges that can be used during the game? obviously, this would mean using technology too. Least then, its up to the teams to manage the use of them accordingly.

 

Considering the angle they were running at, I'm not exactly sure how Luis could end up with stud marks on his knee without it being a dangerous foul. They didn't even land together either.

 

Both going for a bouncing ball with their legs extended, he misses the ball & clatters him. Foul, yes, yellow card, yes. Red card - depends on intent, dangerous play, out of control etc. Dowd's view obviously wasn't conclusive.

 

It certainly does if it's above the knee - that's an illegal challenge whether there was intent or not, it's been made illegal to protect the player from serious injury. There's no question that Dowd didn't see it, anything else, players surrounding the ref, physio remarks whatever shouldn't get in the way of the correct decision. If there were no visible marks then granted he's unsure how high the challenge was and will err on side of caution but he ignored the injury which he just can't do - or shouldn't do, that way in trying to avoid being biased because the physio told him - which is what you claim - he's being biased anyway, towards the 'guilty party' which is equally as bad if not worse because it was the wrong decision.

 

As I posted earlier, IF he saw the stud marks BEFORE he got the card out.

 

**** off Tobes - this is EXACTLY what you're saying.

So don't try and be a condescending prick - it's not big and it's not clever

 

Pretty **** mate. Not a sniff so far, but there MIGHT be an opening here, in a completely different section, but I'll know more early part of next week.

I've also heard that Rolls Royce are currently recruiting and they are only across the road from us, so I'm waiting for a contact name to send my CV into them.

Thanks for asking

 

^^^^ THIS!!!


This is exactly what I was arguing whereas the likes of Toblerone will NEVER base his decision on impartiality if the players name is Suarez.

 

This is still rumbling on?
How many different ways are there to say the same thing?

 

Just keep going. You'll get there

 

Good luck Jonesey

 

We are in a multiverse, you know (possibly)

 

Good luck with that mate, I used to work for them - very good company to work for, great name to have on the CV as well.

 

Just wanna echo the sentiments of the lads Jonesey.

 

Thanks all!

We heard this week as well that my stepdaughter might well be made redundant.

It never rains but it pours.......

 

In that case, the **** should be ****ing sacked