Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Premier League' started by Libby, Aug 4, 2017.
I said show me?
You said summin like 1500 Yeh. Sure you can grab some examples easy enough.
I am ashamed of myself mate.
Nothing to do with VVD. I just live a very sordid lifestyle.
Has this been clarified anywhere? The beeb reported last night that they didn't even look at it, and could have sent him off but only if they felt there was no genuine attempt for the ball.
Either way, if there is a rule stating that then I think it's something that should be changed as those sorts of challenges should be punished regardless of whether the ball's in play or not.
I said show me?
You said summin like 1500 Yeh. Sure you can grab some examples easy enough.[/QUOTE]
Did you rad to the end of my earlier post, Sucky?
Sort ya quotes out ffs ya pair of ****s.
Did you rad to the end of my earlier post, Sucky?[/QUOTE]
Not you bro, they know who they are.
Bet none of them admit to it.
Spineless ****s that they are.
Palace are so ****ing dull.
Its obvious to real Gs like us bruv.
Pussys gotta pussy init.
PJS fake outrage is sickening tbh.
What palpable garbage is being spoken here. So if Mane had been deemed offside when he kicked the city goalie in the head they wouldn't have been able to send him off for serious foul play? Desperate straw clutching going on here. Peter Walton explained the rules perfectly yesterday. Surpr6that some otherwise intelligent posters are even going there. Give your ****ing heads a wobble.
That's the rule for a foul that leads to a penalty. Serious foul play supersedes that.
Beeb seemed to say it's not the case either but that intent would be relevant in this situation?
Surprised there's not been a clarification either way by now tbh, normally Sky are all over that.
Posted before I saw your quote.
There was clarification yesterday by Peter Walton. Case closed
I've seen that **** wrong loads of times tbf. Pretty sure it was him who said Lo Celso's foul against Chelsea wasn't a red last season.
This is the interpretation that the beeb reported that's nothing to do with a penalty (though they don't quote any rule):
The rules suggest Pickford could have been sent off for serious foul play, though this is a subjective call, and had they felt he was making a genuine attempt to play the ball it would not have been possible to award a red card.
Seems silly that intent would come into it when it doesn't normally for serious foul play.
All sendings off are subjective calls. The issue is whether serious foul play can happen when the ball is out of play. It patently can.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing mate. I'm wondering what the intent mentioned above has to do with it, as I'm certain that's not normally the case.
Oh ffs the lines are out again.
Name names pussy