come on Hampy, talk about cherry picking IFs and BUTs! that walters pen was linked to one of these 'poor refeering decisions'.
Warky - we have been in this position before in the last two seasons albeit cast 12 adrift of the play offs. You just can't make 9 points up over a season. You have to be a bloody good side to keep up with the top six let alone the top two and then to actually win three games above and beyond anyone else in the division - and with the problems we have defensively - no chance.
Carra stick to the banter, I don't often go name calling or exchanging personal insults, I certainly haven't done with you, so have a bit of dignity it's getting a bit tiresome.
The pen against Stoke was well outside the area, so clearly shouldn't have been a pen. More than that, general view is that it wasn't even a foul, therfore Barnett shouldn't have been sent off. If we hadn't been incorrectly reduced to ten men against Stoke, we'd almost certainly have taken three points. As for Chelsea, it was a penalty, no argument there. Whether Ruddy should have been sent off is a matter of debate. I'd say yellow card because he was heading away from goal and there was a covering defender, but I can obviously see why others would say red. The bigger issue against Chelsea is that Torres wasn't sent off before the penalty incident, with the scores at 1-1. Had he been sent off, the match would have been a different one. Doesn't mean we'd have got any more from the game, but we'd have had a better chance, and the Ruddy incident probably wouldn't have occured.
I didn't mean that, you're welcome on here at any time, what I'm saying is if you want to give an opinion, you really should look at the evidence first! At Wigan, there was shoulder to shoulder contact OUTSIDE the box, the wigan player had already decided he was going to ground inside the box! At home to Stoke, there was minimal contact, again outside the box, Walters went down because he stepped in front of Barnett and fell over. At Chelsea, as has already been stated, yes it was a penalty, very doubtful if it was a red card(going away from goal, covering defender etc.) and Torres should have been sent off NO QUESTION! In every post so far from you, you have totally ignored all these facts, and it gets to be very frustrating! Hence my remark about you bringing it on yourself!
What a completely pointless article! Its obvious which option the Budgies will vote for and the same with us Townies. A complete waste of keyboard strokes! Speaking of strokes good evening WLOH!
Dave it's you lot who are bloody broken records. There is no question Ruddy should've been sent off. Ramires had gently tapped the ball away from Ruddy, had he not been pulled down he would've slid it into the net. As for the Wigan one - for a start you make your own luck and the dreadful defending got what it deserved - it was 50/50, sometimes you get them, sometimes you don't. Contact started outside the box yes, they were shoulder to shoulder but the coming together that caused the fall was inside. Harsh I will grant you, but far from being a mistake. The Stoke penalty shout I've not seen, but it wasn't scored anyway so whether it was a pen or not you got the luck there. My point is that you are playing a bad luck card that you don't even have to play!
Wouldn´t be the first article on here that´s a waste of space ´tache , and almost certainly not the last, and anyway, no-one´s forced to vote if they don´t want to. Without wishing to blow my own trumpet, I´d have said it was fairly inventive as articles go, wouldn´t you?
We're not going to agree on the Chelsea one (or Wigan), so I edited down to Stoke. First the pen wasn't missed, it was saved, and Barnett was sent off in the award of the pen. How is having your center back sent off for something that wasn't a foul getting the luck? At that point we were leading 1-0, and only conceeded an equaliser deep into injury time. As far as it's possible to say, there's little question that Barnett's dismissal adversly affected the outcome of that match.
