Sam Baldock

[Seasider78]

Aspinall is wrong. Baldock was entitled to challenge for the ball, and Sels kicked him. I've seen the replay 4 or 5 times.

On a booking you simply don't bother with the kind of challenge that will force the referee into a decision

Thought both tackles that led to bookings were stupid and unnecessary. Got to be more intelligent than that at this level

 

[portslade seagull]

Aspinall is wrong. Baldock was entitled to challenge for the ball, and Sels kicked him. I've seen the replay 4 or 5 times.

This !!!

 

[Triggaaar]

The keeper has to have protection when he's kicking in that spot because that challenge could easily break his leg.

Since when did a player break their leg when kicking an opponent in the chest?

I suggest you watch it again.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

He's been dining out on his goal v Arsenal in the FA Cup for far too long.

 

[Triggaaar]

But it's a nothing move, the very best he could realistically hope for is a goal kick.
We all know what the worst case scenario was.

Seriously, before today, I'd have never imagined having a player sent off for just being close to the ball when the keeper kicks it. It was a joke decision.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

On a booking you simply don't bother with the kind of challenge that will force the referee into a decision

Thought both tackles that led to bookings were stupid and unnecessary. Got to be more intelligent than that at this level

Both Sky pundits and Hughton disagree with you.

 

[Hampster Gull]

But it's a nothing move, the very best he could realistically hope for is a goal kick.
We all know what the worst case scenario was.

This. He wasn't thinking, all stary eyed with the big corwd maybe

 

[Seasider78]

Both Sky pundits and Hughton disagree with you.

No both sky pundits and hughton said it was a harsh yellow which I would agree with. My point is it was a stupid challenge to make when on a booking and not one he needed to or should have made. I stick by my point very naive

 

[spence]

No both sky pundits and hughton said it was a harsh yellow which I would agree with. My point is it was a stupid challenge to make when on a booking and not one he needed to or should have made. I stick by my point very naive

It wasn't a stupid challenge. He closed the keeper down who then kicked Baldock and milked it.. What can't you see about that?

Reminds me when Lopez milked a challenge against Newcastle funnily enough.

 

[Seasider78]

It wasn't a stupid challenge. He closed the keeper down who then kicked Baldock and milked it.. What can't you see about that?

Reminds me when Lopez milked a challenge against Newcastle funnily enough.

Of course the goalkeeper milked it and it worked he got our player sent off. Baldock went across the keeper and made contact whilst on a booking very risky. What was he going to achieve from that challenge the decision was only going to go one way.

I would expect a player who is playing in a game where the referee is issuing yellow cards from nothing challenges to read the game a bit and not commit himself to unnecessary and pointless challenges. As soon as the keeper hit the deck the whole ground could see what was going to happen

 

[Superseagull]

If not on a yellow you make the challenge. When on a yellow you don't. It is as simple as that.

Yes, after seeing replays, it was not a yellow but from the refs view it was always a likely yellow if the keeper made a meal of it which he did.

It's all about making the right decision in the heat of the moment. Baldock made the wrong one. We move on.

Up the Albion.

 

[LamieRobertson]

It wasn't a stupid challenge. He closed the keeper down who then kicked Baldock and milked it.. What can't you see about that?

Reminds me when Lopez milked a challenge against Newcastle funnily enough.

I'm with you entirely

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

On a booking you simply don't bother with the kind of challenge that will force the referee into a decision

Thought both tackles that led to bookings were stupid and unnecessary. Got to be more intelligent than that at this level

This is all you need to know

 

[Stat Brother]

Seriously, before today, I'd have never imagined having a player sent off for just being close to the ball when the keeper kicks it. It was a joke decision.

The ref blew the whistle at everything.
He'd booked at least 3 Newcastle players for standing close to the Albion.
There wasn't a bad tackle all game, and yet 7 cards were waved.

As said if it wasn't a red for the foul, it was a deserved red for being so stupid for putting himself in that position.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The ref blew the whistle at everything.
He'd booked at least 3 Newcastle players for standing close to the Albion.
There wasn't a bad tackle all game, and yet 7 cards were waved.

As said if it wasn't a red for the foul, it was a deserved red for being so stupid for putting himself in that position.

Quite.

 

[spence]

Of course the goalkeeper milked it and it worked he got our player sent off. Baldock went across the keeper and made contact whilst on a booking very risky. What was he going to achieve from that challenge the decision was only going to go one way.

I would expect a player who is playing in a game where the referee is issuing yellow cards from nothing challenges to read the game a bit and not commit himself to unnecessary and pointless challenges. As soon as the keeper hit the deck the whole ground could see what was going to happen

Again rubbish


What can he achieve? Did you see what happened when a Huddersfield player charged down the Villa keeper the other week?

People who are saying he shouldn't go for that are simply talking shit. It's almost like talking to non football fans.

 

[spence]

The ref blew the whistle at everything.
He'd booked at least 3 Newcastle players for standing close to the Albion.
There wasn't a bad tackle all game, and yet 7 cards were waved.

As said if it wasn't a red for the foul, it was a deserved red for being so stupid for putting himself in that position.

He booked a few of there players for back chatting

 

[Stat Brother]

He booked a few of there players for back chatting

and yet with that (only) aspect of the game going our way, nimrod decides to hand the geordies that advantage too.

 

[Seasider78]

Again rubbish


What can he achieve? Did you see what happened when a Huddersfield player charged down the Villa keeper the other week?

People who are saying he shouldn't go for that are simply talking shit. It's almost like talking to non football fans.

No it's like talking to football fans who can see what a player on a booking going for a speculative challenge in front of a large home crowd is risking. By all means charge down the keeper but on a booking in a game where the referee is spoiling to get a card out no.

The situation in the villa game happens in what 1/500 attempts by the striker. More often than not the referee will side with the keeper


You have to be more intelligent than that as a player at this level. You clearly disagree that is fine and not faulting baldocks commitment but I would rather he was letting the keeper clear that and staying on the pitch than lunging for at best a speculative chance of winning the ball

 

[spence]

No it's like talking to football fans who can see what a player on a booking going for a speculative challenge in front of a large home crowd is risking. By all means charge down the keeper but on a booking in a game where the referee is spoiling to get a card out no.

The situation in the villa game happens in what 1/500 attempts by the striker. More often than not the referee will side with the keeper


You have to be more intelligent than that as a player at this level. You clearly disagree that is fine and not faulting baldocks commitment but I would rather he was letting the keeper clear that and staying on the pitch than lunging for at best a speculative chance of winning the ball

It's got nothing to do with i intelligence whether he was on a yellow or not. He closed there keeper down like you see every game. That's all there is to it.

You are wrong sorry