Exiled in Texas

Ooops

Should be an easy game then - when in doubt - Advantage Sky Blues

I like that idea, but because it would also broadcast what the players were saying to the referee, and thereby curtail their wining/complaining

LOL at the classroom pic

When I was refereeing U19 Boys and High School games I would have loved the opportunity to replay what I "thought" I saw or what I didn't quite see. No referee wants to get decisions wrong. But then again, there is wrong .... and there is not what team X wanted, which isn't always wrong. Fact and opinion are two very different things

I think all straight Red Card decisions should go to the TMO review (TV Match Official to use rugby parlance). Referee states his decision and then asks the TMO if there is any evidence that indicates the decision is wrong (if its not clear then go with the referee's original decision). I would actually extend this to all Penalty Decisions given in favor of a PK (with the option of a Yellow card/IFK coming out if there was simulation). I think the NHL reviews all goals in real time from their offices in Toronto, so its definitely manageable if they wanted to do that. I'm not convinced about coaches challenges, but if we were to go down that path then the NFL has a good baseline to start with where the coach has to gamble one of their valuable timeouts (for us it could be gambling a substitution opportunity). Win the appeal, and you keep the sub opportunity, lose the appeal and you loose a sub opportunity, which keeps frivolous appeals to a minimum.

Shoulder-to-shoulder is a legal physical challenge when challenging for the ball. But it's not license to charge someone over when chasing down a ball. IMO they were not close enough to play for the ball, and it looked like Colo knew he was being beaten for pace so he resorted to the foul. Stupid play.

That's how I see it (except for last half sentence)

Sadly a clear fukkin Pen (in my view). A desperate play by a defender who knows they are beaten to the ball. A sunday league play. Ball was not within playing distance when Colo shoulders into Fletcher. Shoulder charges are legal when challenging for the ball, but the ball wasn't within playing distance. So its a foul and a penalty. I would say that the 4 D's of DOGSO were not ALL there, so I disagree with the red card. •Number of Defenders: not more than one defender between the foul and the goal, not counting the defender who committed the foul •Distance to goal: the closer the foul is to the goal, the more likely it is an obvious goal scoring opportunity •Distance to ball: the attacker must have been close enough to the ball at the time of the foul to continue playing the ball •Direction of play: the attacker must have been moving toward the goal at the time the foul was committed If any element is missing, there can be no send off for denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity. Further, the presence of each of these elements must be “obvious” in order for the send-off to be appropriate under this provision of Law 12. My problem with the Red Card was that the direction of play was away from the goal, and the distance to the ball was not immediately within reach.

Something about Northumbria Mounted Police and the copper was a Newcastle fan

not to mention the kick between the legs by Naismith on Ivanovic when out of bounds

Lens looks like a good signing for them

WTF..... Ah, I see. It's retractable seating. Pushed back for athletics and pulled forward for football,rugby

Commentators...... "I've seen them given" and presumably not given too. I hate this type of disagreement with the decision but without any commitment. Grow a pair and have an opinion. Either you would or would not card the player and understand that you change the game by the decision. It you don't have the stones to have an opinion then STFU.

It's all about suites/luxury boxes. Those stadiums built in 60/70/80s don't have them and cannot add them easily. It's just too much revenue to loose out on, so they pull the "build me a new stadium here or we move to a city who will". For the cities/States building the stadiums it's all about the tax revenue - both game day ticket/concession sales but also income tax on players salary

OK - my bad (I don't ever read the pre-game threads)

My point wasn't whether Kemen should have played or shouldn't play. The bit that ranked me was that the initial comment was "post-game / 4-1 result / easy game" that he should have played. Its easy in hind sight to say he should have played when we won 4-1. But there were no calls for him to play before the game.

Sorry, but in the circumstances we faced last night, this is laughably ridiculous. Wait - are we taking the cup runs seriously or are we playing the kids? I'm confused. Not picking on either Lotus or Liam here.....because hindsight is a wonderful thing. This time we played a small team and won easily. Last season we played Peterborough and lost. I do wish that we would push Kemen into some serious game time if he is worth it, and perhaps the Cup games are the way to do it. But its also a risk and we have been banging on about taking the cup runs seriously.

Game summaries that show a player who was sent off for a second yellow card, with just one yellow and one red card [YELLOW] [RED] Which looks like they had a yellow card and then were directly sent off for a straight red. The referee shows them all three cards, so the TV summary should also show them. [YELLOW] [YELLOW] [RED] It's my inner Referee showing

He knows the definition of a word, he's just wrong to apply it here. It was calculated, not cowardly. Risk vs reward. We're just not a "nick it at the end team".

They get Cabella for one year (and then buy him in which case the net fee for Thauvin is a lot less).

They're meant to have the option of doing that but never do That's the issue.... it shouldn't be an "option" than CAN be applied, because it never will be. It has to be an automatic part of the process. Setup, Defined and Advised to all before the season starts. Then clubs have to weigh up the risk of appealing vs taking their lumps and getting on with it. It's Vanishing Spray simple..... and we know how they didn't want to implement that at first either.

Wouldn't top 10 be an improvement for this season and/or next? I agree that in 5 years time we would like to be more than "just 10th" but getting up to 10th this season would be good. And I would take for now while we work on getting better looking football and ultimately better results.

IMO - Appeals should come with a one game additional ban if not repealed. Why wouldn't teams appeal when they have nothing to loose? Once they start having to put something onto the table as their stake, then the appeals will be come more realistic.

I don't think its the area as much as the club itself, that player choose. I know Newcastle is further north, and a bit more isolated from the rest of the UK, but its a fantastic city that compares equally with Liverpool or Manchester in terms of facilities or things to do. The difference is that Liverpool, Everton and the Mancs are clubs that are trying to be the best that they can be, whereas Newcastle and Sunderland are struggling to reach those levels. I am convinced that if you had the Man City team playing in Black/White and challenging for the Premier League you would have no problem getting new players to head on up the A1M to Tyneside.