Stop criticising players for 'rolling around' when they've been hacked down. It's preposterous. You should look at why your players are incapable of tackling fairly. "Don't badmouth Snodgrass" Don't be ridiculous. He scissor tackled Tiendalli (not a diver) from the back then spent the rest of the game berating the ref for giving him a yellow. He was still at it when the teams came out second half. Tiendalli was then booed by the morons for the rest of the game for getting himself chopped down - apparently because he held his knee not his ankle. If you've played the game you'll know that an injury can occur elsewehere on the leg, not just the point of contact. Read the rules - tackles from behind warrant a yellow. Michu was also booed for a brief period as well after getting his standing leg swepped away by an opposing player. Do you lot always boo players that are fouled? Thought Norwich were better than that. Pie-man then raked Chico down the leg and should have had a red before later pushing him in the face later. As for Norwich being disappointed - you shouldn't be. Look at the stats. Couple that with Michu's two sitters that he missed and that gives the true picture. Not sure what the BBC are saying but Sky are saying Norwich were fortunate, and they're right. Happy with a point as you remain our bogey team, unfortunately and a neutral would have said a draw was a fair result. Good luck for the rest of the season though there are clearly three teams worse than the Canaries right now.
I think most of them were on EB in the first half! He gave em hell on the right, shame there was not much in the box to benefit
And very few of those were badly timed tackles. There must have been 6 or 7 situations during that game where a Norwich player was brought down cynically and purposefully to avoid us getting into a good position. EB several times and KK a couple of times too. I suppose pulling a player back, knowing you will give away a freekick but that the freekick is not as dangerous a situation as the result of not fouling them is not dirty play? Cheating is what it is!
What I was saying was - Tiendalli was tackled around the ankles but was clutching his knee - how does that work? I am not saying it was not a hard tackle, it was but there is no question that your player made as much of it as possible to influence and make sure a yellow card was dished out, perhaps in the hope of getting him sent off later? He was effectively cheating, doesn't matter how you want to gloss over it, that is what he did. To say a tackle on the ankles effects the knee is total bollocks unless the players falls awkwardly (Which he did not), I know, I played the game for many years and it just does not happen. I have to emphasise that it was a yellow card tackle, I am not going to despute that but the players reaction was a disgrace. As I have pointed out on your board, not all the decision went against you so please don't play that card, there were questionable decision both ways that may or may not have influenced the eventual outcome.
Please don't go on about cheating when you should have been down to 10. Thai - then you are fortunate. It's easy to be tackled and land awkwardly. If you played the game you know that surely? You're trying to defend the indefensible. Booing a player who was scissor tackled from behind is laughable. He didn't need to play act it was always going to be a yellow - read the rules.
Fine, sometimes you have to recognise that you are simply banging your head against a brick wall btw - none of us have defended Grant Holt - he should have been sent off and no-one is going to argue with that.
Worst argument ever. On that logic, no-one can complain. You can't complain about Holt because of De Guzman's tackle. Don't be ridiculous. We've accepted Holt should have been off. We are still allowed to complain that your team were dreadful cheats, because they were. It just highlights it was even.
I will not defend Grant Holt and you may very well be right that we should have had 10. The only thing I will say is that what Grant Holt did he did not do to gain an advantage by breaking up play and stopping the game. I have no idea what his thoughts were and suspect he had none and it was a moment of 'red mist' brought on by frustration. Not the same thing as continually and calculatedly stopping play every time you are in the ****. I have no complaints about the result today, 2-2 was fair from what I saw. I am just a little offended by being called dirty. Norwich have never been a dirty side. In the past we were too much the other way to our own detriment. There is now a element of steal through our side but I certainly do not see us as a dirty side.
I have to say, in all my time on here, going back to bbc606, this is the first time EVER, I've seen a few unreasonable Swans fans! It's a shame, when you look back, we've always been friendly rivals, not so today unfortunately!
Don't accept we were cheating at all. Watch the replay tonight. We're not a team that's known for it and you know that. 5 yellows to 3 remember. Tiendalli was scissor tackled from behind. Not sure what rules you play to over there but it's against the rules of the game as played in this country. Snodgrass and others deserved yellows - and the ref agreed. Why? Because it's in the rules. Oh, apart from not sending the Pie-man off. Ref got that wrong, as you all agree. The only time I saw a 'cheat' from our players was from De Guzman who's challenge on Kamara was cynical, I'll give you that. It was a hard-fought game that both sets of players were eager to win. But don't go on about cheating. You just sound bitter. Sorry Dave, but we're not 'unreasonable'. It's just that we're used to our players being hacked down - just not usually by you lot. To then boo the players that were fouled and accuse our team of being cheats is bound to get Swans fans annoyed. Hopefully the good relationship between our two sets of fans will long continue.
Buggery is what you lot are alledged to be up to with those little furry things. We however are apparently interbred.
Jesus, do they teach you to read down there? I already said it was a yellow card tackle! Go back and read it. Like I said, you will see it one way, we see it another way. It's a 50/50 because unless we know what he was actually thinking we can't know for certain but based on what I saw, something was not right about the reaction to the tackle. The cheating reference was originally brought up by one of your own (DragonPhil), what do you want? Just roll over and accept the accusation and say all Swansea players were saints? Get real mate
"Buggery is what you lot are alledged to be up to with those little furry things" I resent that - Ewoks are cute. Thai - calm down. You're bordering on rudeness and it doesn't suit you. My reply wasn't directed at you.
Funny you should say that, I was holding myself back after a skinful of wonderful Leo. The last thing I want to do is fall out with the Swans fans given that our friendship has been so healthy over recent years
Yawn..2-2 competitive match. Tackles. Ouch. Goals - yes, no one lost. North Korea weren't involved. Nobody starved. We creep towards safety and are not surviving on tree bark. Great game.
Got a lot of time for you Norwich boys! you've done well again this season, but it's got a tad quit on these boards of recent times, so thought I'd liven things up a bit!...................
