Board Meltdowns

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Which board kicks off first?

  • Liverpool

  • Man Utd

  • Swans

  • Saints

  • Hull

Results are only viewable after voting.
50/50 on those decisions you mention, you can see why they were given though.

Overall though, 21 shots to Spurs' 9 shows that Palace were the more ambitious team, and they were rewarded for it in the end with a great strike from Puncheon.
 
Stambouli and Kane at the end.

Stambouli went diving in recklessly, always a danger of giving away a pen. From the ref's perspective it looked a pen all the way.

The Kane one at the end was tricky to call, there was slight contact, but Kane threw his leg out and exaggerated the dive, making it look like he was trying to fool the ref. Again from the ref's perspective, it looked like he was trying to con the ref into giving a pen.

Like the Chadli dive in the first half, the ref wasn't buying any of it.
 
PISKIE said:
Stambouli and Kane at the end.

Stambouli went diving in recklessly, always a danger of giving away a pen. From the ref's perspective it looked a pen all the way.

The Kane one at the end was tricky to call, there was slight contact, but Kane threw his leg out and exaggerated the dive, making it look like he was trying to fool the ref. Again from the ref's perspective, it looked like he was trying to con the ref into giving a pen.

Like the Chadli dive in the first half, the ref wasn't buying any of it.
Click to expand...
So the decisions that he clearly got wrong and the commentators all thought that he got wrong at the time were 50/50, were they?
Ok, then...
Lee Dixon got them right.
 
The commentators I was listening too were divided, hence the 50/50.

I think you're letting your Spurs bias get in the way of clear judgement to be honest <ok>

The facts though are that Palace had 21 shots to Spurs' 9 so there was always the likelihood that they were going to score more than you.
 
PISKIE said:
The commentators I was listening too were divided, hence the 50/50.

I think you're letting your Spurs bias get in the way of clear judgement to be honest <ok>

The facts though are that Palace had 21 shots to Spurs' 9 so there was always the likelihood that they were going to score more than you.
Click to expand...
Which commentators were you listening to? I'm guessing Niall Quinn, by what others have said.
Your comment about bias is good, though. Doing well on the old PKB Scale today! <laugh>
What's left? A claim that I religiously follow what my club's manager does, regardless of how nutty it is?

Relentlessly repeating the same stat's really working for you, though.
Stick with that. <ok>
 
Only the stats count really at the end of the day. The ref's decsions are just opinion.

Palace had more than double the shots that Spurs did, so it was always likely that they would score more.

In fact the stats perfectly convey the final score, 2-1. They had double the amount of shots and scored double the amount of goals, than Spurs.

<ok>
 
Like I said, it doesn't really matter what my or your opinion is (I notice that you blame the ref after almost every spurs loss though)

The stats back up the scoreline. Palace won and Spurs lost, that's all that counts <ok>
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
<laugh>
Consistency isn't your strong point, is it Piskie?
Click to expand...

I think you may have misunderstood me. I meant that opinions about the ref's decisions are just that.

The stats back up the scoreline, double the amount of shots, double the amount of goals. <ok>
 
PISKIE said:
Like I said, it doesn't really matter what my or your opinion is (I notice that you blame the ref after almost every spurs loss though)
Click to expand...
Yep, totally consistent! <laugh>
Would you like some examples of you slagging the ref off after Arsenal games, Piskie?
I can assure you that they're almost as numerous as your arguments with fellow Gooners when you lose.
 
Meh... water off a duck's back mate.

I think I'm pretty balanced with my comments to be honest. I'll call the ref's mistakes if I see them, but if we lose then I'm usually pretty critical of our team. To be honest, most of our loses have been self inflicted this season.
 
Funny, that sense of humour seems to completely desert you when it comes to your own appraisal of referees <laugh>
 
PISKIE said:
Funny, that sense of humour seems to completely desert you when it comes to your own appraisal of referees <laugh>
Click to expand...
A lot of them are ****. I don't think that's an unpopular opinion.
I'd suggest that you contribute to the thread on the Spurs board about how to improve refereeing standards, but... you know.

Who'd want to be a ref in today's environment? You'd have to be mental.
 
You must log in or register to see images
MMMMMMMMmeltdownnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

This thread does exactly what it says on the tin<laugh>
 
PISKIE said:
Yes I know, you had a meltdown and had me banned.
Click to expand...
You were banned due to popular demand, having repeatedly been warned about your persistent ****ty behaviour.
You banned half of your own board too, having consistently got into slagging matches with anyone questioning Saint Wenger.
I won't go into the rest of your appalling crap though, as you'd call it a meltdown.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back