[Albion] Matt O Riley [26/08/24 - sings on a 5-year deal]

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

From 'We Are Brighton'

View attachment 188091

Am I to infer from this that the referee did see the O'Riley challenge, considered it a fair challenge, and that's the end of it? And so because he saw it there is nothing that can now be done retrospectively?

Aside from the procedural utter bollocks, how does one make a rule to distinguish between seeing it but not for what it actually was (like when you look at a cloud and see the face of Jesus in the sky), and not seeing it (because you were looking at something else, or had a paper bag over your head).

Why should it be that in one of these scenarios the referee is to not be questioned, whereas in the other the referee is to be subjected to an FA review of the footage?

This is all procedural bollocks designed to minimise the risk of undermining the supremacy of the on-field ref (and protect him from Hurty Feelings). I see no reason why the Crawley weasel can't be subjected to trial by video and thrown into Hedgecourt lake.

This, incidentally, is 10% about O'Riley and 90% about the wider issue of having a f***ing stupid buttock clenching rubric that introduces a shit-mountain of potential unfairness, and particularly favours small clubs hell-bent on Maiming better sides when the scrutiny of VAR is unavailable (due to yet more FA small-town mentality, technophobia and indefensible cant). Before I'm accused of being unable to Get Over It and Move On.

 

[GT49er]

Did he think it was funny though or was he posing as a tough lad? Humans are a lot more complicated than people think.

Humans are, thugs are just thugs.

 

[kevo]

Has anyone established whether there are any retrospective reviews anymore in the lower divisions and if the rules apply to the EFL cup?

 

[essbee1]

Am I to infer from this that the referee did see the O'Riley challenge, considered it a fair challenge, and that's the end of it? And so because he saw it there is nothing that can now be done retrospectively?

Aside from the procedural utter bollocks, how does one make a rule to distinguish between seeing it but not for what it actually was (like when you look at a cloud and see the face of Jesus in the sky), and not seeing it (because you were looking at something else, or had a paper bag over your head).

Why should it be that in one of these scenarios the referee is to not be questioned, whereas in the other the referee is to be subjected to an FA review of the footage?

This is all procedural bollocks designed to minimise the risk of undermining the supremacy of the on-field ref (and protect him from Hurty Feelings). I see no reason why the Crawley weasel can't be subjected to trial by video and thrown into Hedgecourt lake.

This, incidentally, is 10% about O'Riley and 90% about the wider issue of having a f***ing stupid buttock clenching rubric that introduces a shit-mountain of potential unfairness, and particularly favours small clubs hell-bent on Maiming better sides when the scrutiny of VAR is unavailable (due to yet more small-town mentality, technophobia and indefensible cant). Before I'm accused of being unable to Get Over It and Move On.

My feelings exactly Harry. It's about time we stopped giving refs this "untouchable" image. Come on camera and defend your actions - you made the decisions - you f*****g justify them instead of hiding like the cowards you are behind some fake wall that we're not allowed to see
over. It's 2024 ffs.

 

[Eric the meek]

As far as I am aware, senior figures at the club have been very quiet on it all - the tackle, the referee's decision making, the response of Williams and the damage limitation exercise by Crawley Town Football Club. In nearly 60 years of watching football, I've seen some late tackles, but I've NEVER before witnessed a player wink and smile after injuring another player.

Does anyone know if there are actions being discussed or taking place out of the public domain, away from the press?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

As far as I am aware, senior figures at the club have been very quiet on it all - the tackle, the referee's decision making, the response of Williams and the damage limitation exercise by Crawley Town Football Club. In nearly 60 years of watching football, I've seen some late tackles, but I've NEVER before witnessed a player wink and smile after injuring another player.

Does anyone know if there are actions being discussed or taking place out of the public domain, away from the press?

If anyone knows, PBOBE does, as he worked for the FA, before he went to Canada. Maybe he has sent an email to them? We don't know what goes on behind the scenes.

 

[SeagullinExile]

As far as I am aware, senior figures at the club have been very quiet on it all - the tackle, the referee's decision making, the response of Williams and the damage limitation exercise by Crawley Town Football Club. In nearly 60 years of watching football, I've seen some late tackles, but I've NEVER before witnessed a player wink and smile after injuring another player.

Does anyone know if there are actions being discussed or taking place out of the public domain, away from the press?

I doubt it. We are a classy club that rarely complains. The chances are the club have moved on.

 

[ConfusedGloryHunter]

If anyone knows, PBOBE does, as he worked for the FA, before he went to Canada. Maybe he has sent an email to them? We don't know what goes on behind the scenes.

That explains it then. PBOBE is still writing the email, obviously.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Does anyone know if there are actions being discussed or taking place out of the public domain, away from the press?

Like what exactly

"Dear F.A

We are REALLY upset about that tackle. Please can we ask all players to be nicer in future and not commit bad fouls.

We are also really upset that the referee got the decision wrong. Please tell referees to always make the right decision.

Kind regards,

BHA"

 

[kevo]

What a c**t

 

[Bold Seagull]

If anyone knows, PBOBE does, as he worked for the FA, before he went to Canada. Maybe he has sent an email to them? We don't know what goes on behind the scenes.

They might be still reading through it…

 

[kevo]

As far as I am aware, senior figures at the club have been very quiet on it all - the tackle, the referee's decision making, the response of Williams and the damage limitation exercise by Crawley Town Football Club. In nearly 60 years of watching football, I've seen some late tackles, but I've NEVER before witnessed a player wink and smile after injuring another player.

Does anyone know if there are actions being discussed or taking place out of the public domain, away from the press?

The only action they can take realistically is to ask PGMOL to look at it.

There must surely be some avenue for retrospective punishment for incidents in games not covered by VAR.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I doubt it. We are a classy club that rarely complains. The chances are the club have moved on.

Yep, Matt is still going to be injured whatever the outcome, we’re still in the cup, Brighton gain nothing from any sanction made to Crawley or their player. So while the rest of us would like to see some justice, the reality is we have nothing to gain.

The only action they can take realistically is to ask PGMOL to look at it.

There must surely be some avenue for retrospective punishment for incidents in games not covered by VAR.

 

[Mike Small]

Ffs Just drop it down a notch. Lindsay’s wife died of cancer @ 44 in 2019 and he has brought up 3 girls while trying to maintain a career in the mad f***ing football world. Awful tackle yes. Awful man… nah.

Didn't know that about him. I'll save my description of him for what he was like on the touchline and how he behaved at the end of the game. As I said in my post, I don't appreciate his comments about the tackle.

 

[mothy]

If Billy gilmour doesnt go for an underpriced £15m (& his value is higher, say £40m), is the £25m spent on o'riley who then gets injured & maybe never plays again good value? As we keep WBG

 

[macbeth]

If Billy gilmour doesnt go for an underpriced £15m (& his value is higher, say £40m), is the £25m spent on o'riley who then gets injured & maybe never plays again good value? As we keep WBG

‘maybe never plays again’?

 

[TugWilson]

Like what exactly

"Dear F.A

We are REALLY upset about that tackle. Please can we ask all players to be nicer in future and not commit bad fouls.

We are also really upset that the referee got the decision wrong. Please tell referees to always make the right decision.

Kind regards,

BHA"

I was thinking more in the line of do your ****ing job or get someone who can .

 

[mothy]

‘maybe never plays again’?

Yeah. Like a career ending injury caused by some twats challenge

 

[One Love]

We don't know. Most educated guess is 3 months.

Looking at the footage his ankle is caught with all his weight on it and sprained.

The problem is the force with which Williams comes in. Got to be badly torn ligaments or even worse.

Three months is being very optimistic.

Having done it myself badly, I reckon more like 6 months.

 

[Eric the meek]

Looking at the footage his ankle is caught with all his weight on it and sprained.

The problem is the force with which Williams comes in. Got to be badly torn ligaments or even worse.

Three months is being very optimistic.

Having done it myself badly, I reckon more like 6 months.

The club statement is of the 'we don't know when he will be back' variety. Probably too many variables to be precise on timescale. Surgery, healing, rehabilitation, training may all go well or otherwise.