Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Guest bimpy474

Harsh yellow like, Adam didn't have a clue Parker was there.

 

That doesn't really matter. It was ugly, and clearly a yellow card.

 

It really wasn't and it does matter. If you don't know there's a player behind you and you go for a high ball with your foot it isn't a foul. It's raiding your leg, you're still allowed to raise your leg.

 

But as the rules stand, there doesn't have to be intent, unlike say handball, he was high and missed the ball, studs down Parker leg, hence the booking, may not be fair but the ref is right by the rule book, which is shite by the way on many things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harsh yellow like, Adam didn't have a clue Parker was there.

 

That doesn't really matter. It was ugly, and clearly a yellow card.

 

It really wasn't and it does matter. If you don't know there's a player behind you and you go for a high ball with your foot it isn't a foul. It's raising your leg, you're still allowed to raise your leg.

 

It stopped Parker in his strides, and was ugly. You can't deny that. A yellow card is very fair.

 

If it's a dangerous high foot it's still a foul. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harsh yellow like, Adam didn't have a clue Parker was there.

 

That doesn't really matter. It was ugly, and clearly a yellow card.

 

It really wasn't and it does matter. If you don't know there's a player behind you and you go for a high ball with your foot it isn't a foul. It's raiding your leg, you're still allowed to raise your leg.

 

But as the rules stand, there doesn't have to be intent, unlike say handball, he was high and missed the ball, studs down Parker leg, hence the booking, may not be fair but the ref is right by the rule book, which is shite by the way on many things.

 

Ok didn't realise that there doesn't have to be intent. I'm still sticking with it was a harsh yellow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest sydneycove

Harsh yellow like, Adam didn't have a clue Parker was there.

 

That doesn't really matter. It was ugly, and clearly a yellow card.

 

It really wasn't and it does matter. If you don't know there's a player behind you and you go for a high ball with your foot it isn't a foul. It's raiding your leg, you're still allowed to raise your leg.

 

Not with studs up.

 

You're not allowed to raise your leg with studs up? So in the game of football you can only raise your leg in a certain way?

 

Comes under dangerous play. Lucky it was only a second yellow to be honest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harsh yellow like, Adam didn't have a clue Parker was there.

 

That doesn't really matter. It was ugly, and clearly a yellow card.

 

It really wasn't and it does matter. If you don't know there's a player behind you and you go for a high ball with your foot it isn't a foul. It's raising your leg, you're still allowed to raise your leg.

 

It stopped Parker in his strides, and was ugly. You can't deny that. A yellow card is very fair.

 

If it's a dangerous high foot it's still a foul.

 

Going of what Bimpy said if there doesn't have to be intent fair enough, but he didn't have a clue that Parker was behind him, calling it ugly implies there was intent behind the action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest bimpy474

Harsh yellow like, Adam didn't have a clue Parker was there.

 

That doesn't really matter. It was ugly, and clearly a yellow card.

 

It really wasn't and it does matter. If you don't know there's a player behind you and you go for a high ball with your foot it isn't a foul. It's raiding your leg, you're still allowed to raise your leg.

 

But as the rules stand, there doesn't have to be intent, unlike say handball, he was high and missed the ball, studs down Parker leg, hence the booking, may not be fair but the ref is right by the rule book, which is s**** by the way on many things.

 

Ok didn't realise that there doesn't have to be intent. I'm still sticking with it was a harsh yellow.

 

Thats why the rules are cack, intent, no intent its crap, the refs aren't allowed to use Discretion, if they were we wouldn't have this intent/no intent stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said all along that Dalglish will only ever provide team spirit and fan support, he will never have the tactical capabilities to battle with the top four.

 

Today:

 

Skrtel vs Bale

Carroll moved to the left (after sending off)

 

Both very poor decisions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was a booking like, doesn't really matter whether there is intent when you stud someone that high up. It was just clumsy more than anything.

 

Didn't see the first booking mind you. It's very difficult to want either team to win this, but I reckon Tottenham are my preference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harsh yellow like, Adam didn't have a clue Parker was there.

 

That doesn't really matter. It was ugly, and clearly a yellow card.

 

It really wasn't and it does matter. If you don't know there's a player behind you and you go for a high ball with your foot it isn't a foul. It's raiding your leg, you're still allowed to raise your leg.

 

But as the rules stand, there doesn't have to be intent, unlike say handball, he was high and missed the ball, studs down Parker leg, hence the booking, may not be fair but the ref is right by the rule book, which is s**** by the way on many things.

 

Ok didn't realise that there doesn't have to be intent. I'm still sticking with it was a harsh yellow.

 

Thats why the rules are cack, intent, no intent its crap, the refs aren't allowed to use Discretion, if they were we wouldn't have this intent/no intent stuff.

 

:thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest bimpy474

Harsh yellow like, Adam didn't have a clue Parker was there.

 

That doesn't really matter. It was ugly, and clearly a yellow card.

 

It really wasn't and it does matter. If you don't know there's a player behind you and you go for a high ball with your foot it isn't a foul. It's raising your leg, you're still allowed to raise your leg.

 

It stopped Parker in his strides, and was ugly. You can't deny that. A yellow card is very fair.

 

If it's a dangerous high foot it's still a foul.

 

Going of what Bimpy said if there doesn't have to be intent fair enough, but he didn't have a clue that Parker was behind him, calling it ugly implies there was intent behind the action.

 

I've done the ref's course and its mind boggling, some of its so straight forward but some is just stupid, i mean really stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harsh yellow like, Adam didn't have a clue Parker was there.

 

That doesn't really matter. It was ugly, and clearly a yellow card.

 

It really wasn't and it does matter. If you don't know there's a player behind you and you go for a high ball with your foot it isn't a foul. It's raiding your leg, you're still allowed to raise your leg.

 

But as the rules stand, there doesn't have to be intent, unlike say handball, he was high and missed the ball, studs down Parker leg, hence the booking, may not be fair but the ref is right by the rule book, which is s**** by the way on many things.

 

Ok didn't realise that there doesn't have to be intent. I'm still sticking with it was a harsh yellow.

 

Thats why the rules are cack, intent, no intent its crap, the refs aren't allowed to use Discretion, if they were we wouldn't have this intent/no intent stuff.

 

I agree in theory, but the problem is, allowing the ref to use discretion relies upon referees having a clue about the intricacies of playing the game. I'm not sure I'd trust any of the referees to really use their discretion right now tbh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...