You don't think kicking somebody in the GONADS is 'dangerous'?
I just watched the incident and thought "petulant nonsense". That's a free kick all day long obviously but you want a retrospective ban for that? Jesus Christ.
You don't think kicking somebody in the GONADS is 'dangerous'?
Quite. Bong didn't make an issue of it, so I assume no contact was made, although it was clearly attempted. I still believe no retrospective action will be taken.
Neither you nor anyone else can say that with any conviction or certainty
This. Of course it wouldn't have been called off. If someone as daft and stubborn as you at Palace had just flipped and refused to give out a ticket and your mate at the FA had pushed it as far as it could go, can you imagine the police saying 'don't worry, we'll deal with the fallout that's going to occur here when thousands of fans hear what's happened', and the ref calling the game off? You've got no common sense BG. The game would have gone ahead and whoever made the decision at Palace would later get told off (punishment unknown, maybe they'd have to go to dinner with you).Lol yes we bloody well can. I am 100% convinced with TOTAL conviction AND certainty, that that match wouldn't have been called off.
And so is every other sane member of NSC who has read this thread so far.
You need medical help.
Well that's easy to believe.As a former referee, this is one reason why the game has trouble recruiting referees, particularly the young. Not enough support and backing from the county FAs.
I just watched the incident and thought "petulant nonsense". That's a free kick all day long obviously but you want a retrospective ban for that? Jesus Christ.
It's much like Hemed's suggested stamp. That 'stamp' didn't cause any damage, it wasn't dangerous, it was (if it had been intended) petulant.I just watched the incident and thought "petulant nonsense". That's a free kick all day long obviously but you want a retrospective ban for that? Jesus Christ.
When that happened I was praying the ref would yellow card him because play had carried on and it wasn't clear if he would. He would have got a retro ban if he hadn't have be carded.According to the Mail, Duffy should have got a straight red but was given a yellow. No further action can be taken now.
It's much like Hemed's suggested stamp. That 'stamp' didn't cause any damage, it wasn't dangerous, it was (if it had been intended) petulant.
The ban is to discourage players doing it again. Lukaku shouldn't be kicking out off the ball like that.
Whether he actually gets a ban - I don't really care - it has no effect on our season.
But if Hemed's (questionable intent) deserves a ban, this 100% does too, or the rules are nonsensical.
It's much like Hemed's suggested stamp. That 'stamp' didn't cause any damage, it wasn't dangerous, it was (if it had been intended) petulant.
The ban is to discourage players doing it again. Lukaku shouldn't be kicking out off the ball like that.
Neither you nor anyone else can say that with any conviction or certainty as that is not what the secretary of Surrey told Palace that made them find me a seat. As I have said nobody knows if he would have carried out his threat but knowing how much he loathed the Palace hierarchy I am sure he would have done his utmost.
No, I'm sure we do want it. Manager gets a review per half or something, get told Bong was fouled, asks for a review, no goal, free-kick.Are we sure we don't want some sort of cricket style TMO review system in place?
But rewinding this, I fear for the game a bit when this sort of witch-hunt takes hold. Had the officials done their jobs properly, it would have been a free kick, no goal, and no NSC thread 150 posts in length. Are we sure we don't want some sort of cricket style TMO review system in place? Would have worked a TREAT here. No goal, no petty retrospective ban, just the implementation of some common sense.
He could have been a barrister you know.
I'm afraid everybody knows, BG.
He could have been a barrister you know.
That is why my mum wanted me to become a barrister.
He could have been a barrister you know.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/foo...ouble&&ns_fee=0#post_5a1bc7a3e4b04d1c756cc8a2
Appears this is gathering momentum!
Lineker on why it wasn't on Match of the Day on Saturday night.
"We didn’t see it at the time. We had 5 games to watch at 3pm. Wasn’t mentioned by a single Sunday newspaper. Only came to light after a few Brighton fans mentions on Twitter late on Saturday night. Certainly was not a decision to not show it. ��"
Daily Mail have gone to town on it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ed-news-Lukaku-miss-Manchester-derby-ban.html
I don't think it's anything like Hemed's stamp, that one was all about whether there was intent or not. This one is an off the ball kick (two actually). It is 100% a red card all day long. In which case there should be a retrospective ban. Not that it makes any difference whatsever to us now, so I can't see why anybody really cares.
I think it's as well you didn't.It is what my mother wanted me to do. I didnt even consider it as a possibility while at school. I only got interested in the law profession as I got older and regret that I didnt take my mrthers advice
I think it's as well you didn't.