Marc1901
Peace out.
In the car coming home a Swindon fan e-mailed in to 606 i think(?) and said that Ankergren should of seen red. IMO Tommy and i think El-Abd was behind him so it wasnt a red. What did everyone else think of it?.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Ankergren's yellow card.
- Thread starter Marc1901
- Start date
Djmiles
Barndoor Holroyd
I thought it was a red when I saw it. Will be interesting to see the highlights, but I thought he was very lucky.
clippedgull
Hotdogs, extra onions
The inbreds are just bitter and twisted. BBC Sussex said it was a yellow card offence as Austin was taking the ball away from goal.
Hercules Rockerfeller
New member
They said on the radio there were two players covering and the player was also going away from goal, so a yellow was correct, but they were biased.
A certain Mr Poyet said the same after too, but also that on another day he would have been shown a red, although it would have left him fuming.
A certain Mr Poyet said the same after too, but also that on another day he would have been shown a red, although it would have left him fuming.
Gully
Monkey in a seagull suit.
Danny Wilson has also said that it was a yellow and that the referee called it right...that is enough for me.
Definite yellow. Ball had nearly got away from Austin and he was going away from goal, with 2 defenders covering.
El-Abd played the ball and was harshly booked. Felt Swindon made a meal of everything.
If the ref was going by the book Prutton could have been sent off 'raising his hands' and treading on Elliott. Austinn for persistent foul play and dissent. So I'm not sure Swindon have much of an argument...
El-Abd played the ball and was harshly booked. Felt Swindon made a meal of everything.
If the ref was going by the book Prutton could have been sent off 'raising his hands' and treading on Elliott. Austinn for persistent foul play and dissent. So I'm not sure Swindon have much of an argument...
severnside gull
Well-known member
Definite yellow not a red. Danny Wilson got it right
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,857
Not sure it matters who is behind anymore - didn't they change the "last man" rule ?
It's about stopping an obvious goalscoring opportunity isn't it ?
albionalex
Well-known member
It was a clear yellow.
Gerbil
Nsc's most loved
I was amazed it was yellow, blatent red
Prodigal Son
Getting older by the day
Not this season too, please!jordanseagull
Well-known member
- Feb 11, 2009
- 4,151
Seriously?
No way a red!
Withdean Wanderer
Banned
Defence showed common sense and got goal side - definitely not a red
The phrase 'last man' has been eliminated, and you're right, it is about obvious goal scoring opportunity, but if the goal keeper is out of position going away from goal might not be enough for some refs, so having two players whom he would have to get past makes it even less obvious, I think. Though that reasoning would only work if they are in a position to block the shot or make it even less obvious, and that may not apply in this instance.
throbinson
Well-known member
if elphick had done hes job it wouldnt of happened, imo should of been red
User Removed
New member
The most amazing thing about this topic is the revelation a Swindon fan is able to use email.
I've been here few times now over the years, and me and a couple of mates went in to the (apparent) town for a few beers afterwards.
It is without doubt one of the bleakest, dullest and uninviting towns I've ever been to.
I've been here few times now over the years, and me and a couple of mates went in to the (apparent) town for a few beers afterwards.
It is without doubt one of the bleakest, dullest and uninviting towns I've ever been to.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,857
It is definately more open to interpretation than it was before.
imissworthing2
New member
It was never a red by the time he would of next touched the ball we would have had 3/4 players back.