The Premier League Thread

  • 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!
fatletiss said:
But he was off balance ..... :)

The panel - 3 ex-refs. When will they use some common sense and have a mix on the panel.
Click to expand...

What? One of each gender? What did you have in mind, mate?

Presumably you are arguing for ex-players to look at stuff. It's interesting that cricket umpires are often ex-players, frequently at quite a high level too. In my experience they're pretty wise to the "law-stretching tactics" of players as they were often poachers turned gamekeepers.
 
Qwerty said:
To be fair they do. Some lawyer called Stuart Ripley is usually the chairman, and he has kicked a ball before. Could be wrong (who me?) but I think the three ex-refs decide who should be charged then the disciplinary panel decide guilty or not, with the ex-refs' opinion being the sort of "prosecution case". Hope that's confused things even more.
Click to expand...

Totally. Now bugger off! :emoticon-0100-smile
 
  • Like
Reactions: Libby and Qwerty
Qwerty said:
To be fair they do. Some lawyer called Stuart Ripley is usually the chairman, and he has kicked a ball before. Could be wrong (who me?) but I think the three ex-refs decide who should be charged then the disciplinary panel decide guilty or not, with the ex-refs' opinion being the sort of "prosecution case". Hope that's confused things even more.
Click to expand...

Maybe I need a word with that Ripley fella :emoticon-0104-surpr
 
Qwerty said:
Aha, in which case you agree with Tom, as the panel only has to decide on the balance of probabilities :).
Click to expand...

By the way, is that true ... "The balance of probabilities" ?? I didn't know that and even more strange then. As I said all along, I'm probably on the side of he wanted to do it, but that would be such a tight "balance of probabilities" that I couldn't be sure.... it sort of flies in the face of referees not supposed to give decisions unless they are sure. Mings glances down before he goes over Rooney and then his eyes stay fixed in the direction of the ball. His leg doesn't change direction to either side and he lands naturally. I am amazed that they found him guilty.

My feelings were about 52% - 48%. Still, that's enough to change the fundamental structure of an entire nation, so perhaps I should concede.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Qwerty and Missing Lambo
fatletiss said:
By the way, is that true ... "The balance of probabilities" ?? I didn't know that and even more strange then. As I said all along, I'm probably on the side of he wanted to do it, but that would be such a tight "balance of probabilities" that I couldn't be sure.... it sort of flies in the face of referees not supposed to give decisions unless they are sure. Mings glances down before he goes over Rooney and then his eyes stay fixed in the direction of the ball. His leg doesn't change direction to either side and he lands naturally. I am amazed that they found him guilty.

My feelings were about 52% - 48%. Still, that's enough to change the fundamental structure of an entire nation, so perhaps I should concede.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, FLT. Drop it. We all now know that 52% support is a "ringing endorsement". <doh>
 
  • Like
Reactions: davecg69 and fatletiss
fatletiss said:
By the way, is that true ... "The balance of probabilities" ?? I didn't know that and even more strange then. As I said all along, I'm probably on the side of he wanted to do it, but that would be such a tight "balance of probabilities" that I couldn't be sure.... it sort of flies in the face of referees not supposed to give decisions unless they are sure. Mings glances down before he goes over Rooney and then his eyes stay fixed in the direction of the ball. His leg doesn't change direction to either side and he lands naturally. I am amazed that they found him guilty.
Click to expand...

Yeah. So when John Terry went on trial for racially insulting Anton Ferdinand he was cleared in criminal court (no reasonable doubts), but the FA panel found him guilty anyway (balance of probabilities). Mings denied meaning to stamp on him but the hearing had to decide whether they believed him.

PS I never said this made sense.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: fatletiss
His manager made a good point yesterday....he believed his player, the video (in my opinion) looked like it wasn't deliberate but was careless, and yet several experts decided it was deliberate and dangerous enough to warrant missing 5 matches...and we are about to introduce video referees. His point was that we can't look to video evidence and expect total agreement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Libby
Cherries miss a penalty then West Ham go up the other end and score.
 
Good going for us so far, with West Ham and WBA both losing (and every chance of Burnley losing vs Liverpool). A solid end to the season for us, and we can finish in the top 8 for the fourth consecutive season.

Massive goal for Hull.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Qwerty and OddRiverOakWizards
MLsfc said:
It is annoying seeing everton doing so well. Especially as they look like they'll keep hold of lukaku, he is way too good for them!
Click to expand...

Agree about Lukaku, but disagree about Everton. I've not nothing against them, and with their squad they really should be in the top seven. Martinez just did an awful job for two years (albeit with a much weaker middle of the park than what Everton now have).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Libby
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back