AyeDubbleYoo

Encouraging news, don't want to see him rushed, hopefully he will be fit and play a few games before the end of the season - giving us an excuse to sell Smith and/or Nolan.

That's interesting reading, I certainly didn't know that the FA rules actually provide for retrospective action.

Is it not a bit misleading to say things like the FA have 'copped out' or they're 'powerless to act'? I would think it's more that they have a system of not reversing referees decisions after the event, and they've decided not to make exceptions in individual cases. The whole point is that it was not deemed violent by the referee (who says he saw it), who is the best-placed person to tackle violence in the game. He was obviously wrong, but referees sometimes are.

It's not a contradiction at all. Some people have the authority to question the referees (The FA, the referee's assessors) and some people don't (John Terry, Sir Alex Ferguson). There's no contradiction in that, it's about maintaining the referees authority. In theory, he should be above questioning from players and managers. As I said before though, we now have the problem that millions of people see and analyse every wrong decision. If the nuance is on who is questioning the referee, then fine why can't the FA or referee's assessors (who can question) have a look at serious incidents and then decide that the ref did not make the right call, demote the ref (which they already do) and in addition impose a suitable ban on the player who was not punished? Well I can't really answer for the FA, but I would think because there's a subtle distinction between assessing the performance of referees and actively reversing their decisions. The first one is sensible, and helps to make sure the best referees are at the top. It is for the benefit of the game in general, and I guess wasn't intended as a matter for public debate (obviously in these days of media saturation it is). The option you're suggesting goes much further, and seeks to redress any damage done to players and clubs. This is quite a big change in principle, and doesn't sit well with the idea that referees decisions are basically final and should be accepted. The system doesn't want to pretend that referees are always right, but it does want to make sure their decisions are always accepted. I agree this is slightly naive and has a bit of a logical flaw in it if you look hard enough, all I'm saying is I can see why the authorities are sticking by the system as it is. The principle is correct, it's just that times have moved on a bit.

It's not a contradiction at all. Some people have the authority to question the referees (The FA, the referee's assessors) and some people don't (John Terry, Sir Alex Ferguson). There's no contradiction in that, it's about maintaining the referees authority. In theory, he should be above questioning from players and managers. As I said before though, we now have the problem that millions of people see and analyse every wrong decision.

At least the manager knows he exists, which is an improvement on how he's been treated in the past.

Well it works on the principal that the referee should be 'infallible' in practice, and that his decisions aren't open to constant questioning and undermining by pissed off managers. I actually agree with that principle... the problem is that these days we all see when a decision is wrong anyway.

We knew that already though, and so did NUFC. The whole thing was pointless basically, except to express our anger.

Arsenal, because the way they play is immense. Fulham, because I always went to see us play there... and it's a cool little ground. Other than that I don't really have any feelings about the rest.

Depressing as it is, seems pointless to be discussing lineups that don't include Nolan.

Keep forgetting just how young he is... plenty of time for him to be introduced to the first team. Would like to see him brought back next season and given appearances from the bench.

If we had gone down like Sheffield Utd we would be going absolutely apeshit. No way they can be criticised for that IMO, the way it unfolded was a disgrace.

Don't really hate any clubs. I didn't even really dislike Spurs until Harry took over. Him I do hate. Don't even hate Sunderland that much, I just have to play along with the comedy hatred of them because it's expected. I give them virtually no thought unless it's derby weekend.

I recorded that episode on Sky+, but I deleted the fucking thing as soon as I got in that night. Some things you don't want to here MOTD fuckwits talking about.

Aye, but what about Routledge?

It will be very bad for the team if he does.

Multiball!

I wonder if you would find ad hoc comments like this on nearly every club website? When people are hungry for info, these short of throw-away things get reported and blown out of proportion.

I really want to see a 'fair play board' or something like that. They would review the weekend's games and apply retrospective punishments for diving and dangerous play. Obviously would be difficult to extend down the whole football league, where all games aren't filmed... but the Premier League would be a good start. Ironic that pretending to be injured and injuring people on purpose can be on the rise at the same time.

De Jong could solve two problems at once here, he could go round the world apologising to all the players he's flattened, he wouldn't be finished until Ben Arfa is back playing anyway.

We never seemed interested in playing Lua Lua when he was here, don't think we'll be worrying about trying to recall him.

The high defensive line did seem risky though, didn't it... they could well have scored 2 or 3 when they broke in behind us. In the end it worked, but it was relying on some impressive individual defending.

Can't believe the U21s are getting involved in politics like that. It's bad enough when the full team does it.

I want to mock this, but I actually love it!