BensGrandad
New member
Charlie Austin charged with violent conduct after challenging the goalkeeper for a ball against Huddersfield and as I saw it accidentally catching him in the face. Then again he doesnt play for 'a big club'
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Football gone soft.
- Thread starter BensGrandad
- Start date
SIMMO SAYS
Well-known member
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Looked nasty and intentional to me.
All about opinions.
I liked they way the boy Line-Acre took it as another chance to have a pop at Shearer.
All about opinions.
I liked they way the boy Line-Acre took it as another chance to have a pop at Shearer.
Cowfold Seagull
Fan of the 17 bus
Do you really think a player would intentionally kick a fellow professional in the head? I don't, not even in this day and age. At the end of the day his manager would have been disappointed if Charlie Austin hadn't gone for that ball.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Like I said, all about opinions. I thought the 'keeper comfortably had the ball ages before Austin arrived and THEN stuck his foot out.
BensGrandad
New member
- Thread starter
- #6
I agree and would add he is the type of striker we need to sign.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,772
Guy Fawkes
The voice of treason
- Sep 29, 2007
- 8,297
What ....Injured ?!?
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,630
Funny. I watched it a few times and at first thought it was just one of those things. Could easily see why the referee hadn't spotted anything wrong.
The last few times I've seen it, I keep thinking he's just flicked his boot out, perhaps thinking he'd let the keeper know he was there (I can't believe he'd actually try to hurt the bloke, but perhaps he didn't consider that risk in his actions). Naughty. I'm not surprised the FA have charged him. Given that he's not Romelu Lukaku, however, he'll get a three match ban inevitably. Which will ultimately be irrelevant given that he knackered his hamstring yesterday.
The last few times I've seen it, I keep thinking he's just flicked his boot out, perhaps thinking he'd let the keeper know he was there (I can't believe he'd actually try to hurt the bloke, but perhaps he didn't consider that risk in his actions). Naughty. I'm not surprised the FA have charged him. Given that he's not Romelu Lukaku, however, he'll get a three match ban inevitably. Which will ultimately be irrelevant given that he knackered his hamstring yesterday.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,630
Corrected that for you.
am beginning to hate this retrospective banning of players caught on tv. The pundits opinions seem to over rule everything. The very same pundits that have always had a history of being very bias. How can they be 100% sure they are right I couldn't. I have seen the Austin incident am fairly sure he will be banned. Am also fairly unsure weather it was deliberate just like the Hemed ban earlier in the season. Neither in my opinion were deliberate how can the FA panel be so sure they were?
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
Have a look at this it you haven't seen it. Far more obviously intentional than Hemed's stamp.
https://twitter.com/htafc_polls/status/944592726506524672
And BG.
https://twitter.com/htafc_polls/status/944592726506524672
And BG.
BensGrandad
New member
- Thread starter
- #13
That is why I said type of player based on his goal scoring ability
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,877
Not so much gone soft but grown up over head injuries.
Looked to me that he "instinctively" went to knock the ball out of the goalkeeper's hands, mistimed the entire thing and caught his face.
Straight red whatever the intention.
Sent from my BTV-DL09 using Tapatalk
el punal
Well-known member
Do you remember a similar situation at Withdean in 2010. We were playing Bournemouth when one of their players decided to, accidentally/on purpose/let him know I'm here shit, dropped his boot conveniently on Ankergren's nose and breaking it. Everyone in the ground knew it was deliberate except the hapless, useless ref and his linos. This was the same tw*t trio who awarded B'muff a penalty for a foul two yards outside the box.
sussex_guy2k2
Well-known member
- Jun 6, 2014
- 4,080
I do wish people would realise that no intention is required for a sending off offence to occur. This lack of knowledge of the basic rules that govern our game lead to stupid threads like this where we get told the game has gone soft.
The issue with Austin’s situation isn’t that he got sent off (he should have been sent off), it’s the lack of consistency across the whole game with regards to big decisions.
martin tyler
Well-known member
- Jan 25, 2013
- 5,967
Hadn’t seen it till now.
Having viewed it though he’s going to get 3 game ban. He flicks the boot out in a deliberate manner and catches him. Can see why froma distance the referee may not see it like that
Having viewed it though he’s going to get 3 game ban. He flicks the boot out in a deliberate manner and catches him. Can see why froma distance the referee may not see it like that
Cheshire Cat
The most curious thing..
Couldn't be sure if there was anything deliberate or malicious. However he didn't appear to try very hard to move his foot away from the keeper's face, and caught him in his follow-though. It might have been accidental, but the keeper had the ball, couldn't get out of the way, and a kick in the face is still painful and dangerous
Magic Sponge
Well-known member
Did not look like an accident to me, he had plenty of time to choose not to put his foot in for the ball once the keeper had collected it.
Can't believe anyone that watched it on MOTD, and I'm assuming most that have commented saw it there as no doubt they were at the Amex yesterday, cannot see that he had no entitlement to flick his boot out as the keeper had full control of the ball and that was sometime before Austin got there. We all know BG's penchant for posting rubbish but from someone who claims to have had involvement in football (I believe he was a scout of some sort) it beggars belief!
Far from expecting him to go for that ball, I very much doubt that his manager is impressed. Hopefully any ban will extend beyond his recovery from his so called injury. Could be an argument for introducing a rule where you are banned from games you are available for. If you're injured the ban starts when you are recovered (would be interesting to see if they could come up with some way of policing that!).
Far from expecting him to go for that ball, I very much doubt that his manager is impressed. Hopefully any ban will extend beyond his recovery from his so called injury. Could be an argument for introducing a rule where you are banned from games you are available for. If you're injured the ban starts when you are recovered (would be interesting to see if they could come up with some way of policing that!).