MOTD ... FFS... Joke

[Anonymous]

After Chelseas pasting there it was never gonna be easy for us , Wigan have some useful players and defended well ........ a point isn't such a bad outcome for us , although it was a bit alarming that we failed to create much in front of goal.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Yes it was a penalty,

No it wasnt an unfair senfding off. The first yellow was dubious, however it was given, he shouldnt have been flying in like that for the 2nd. Bad bad zab.

He was unfair, because the ref was not consistant, he should not have booked Zabs in the first place, and he didn't booked the Wigan players for doing the same things.

But yes Zabs should have been more careful once he was (unfairly) already in the book. Sometimes Zabs is kind of a red card waiting to happen, but you couldn't take that out of his game I don't think as he wouldn't be half the defender he is.

The lack of consistency stems from the fact that refs allow two or three challenges before they see fit to flourish the first card. The caution often is for a tackle that is less of an infringement than the ones that have gone before. Zab's first tackle involved a minimum contact and this is yet another example of a bloody pie eating player overreacting to a fair challenge. Wiley was done with this one, The second challenge made no contact whatsoever but the opponent makes the most of it and CHOOSES to go down when he could easily have jumped over the challenge and continues but there's more advantage in getting a player booked and going on to win against ten.

There was an incident in the BBurn Burnley game at the end where the Burnley keeper was dismissed. He shouldn't have been charging out anyway but the Blackburn player chose to allow his feet to make contact with the prone goalkeeper. The attacker has made the foul and got the keeper sent off. Why refs can't see what they are doing is beyond me.

 

[felixbg]

call me stupid but where was this stonewall penalty? ... i was at the game but cant remember that? ... or very much of the game for that matter

 

[Anonymous]

call me stupid but where was this stonewall penalty? ... i was at the game but cant remember that? ... or very much of the game for that matter

They're probably referring to the challenge on SWP as he charged into the area at the City end ...... Andy Gray reckoned it was a definite penalty , although i didn't think it was myself.

 

[felixbg]

rubbish, not a penalty at all

 

[ell]

How is it not a penalty when the defender made no contact with the ball whatsoever??

 

[Pam]

It was totally a penalty.

 

[KenTheLandlord]

The penalty call was wrong, it should have been a penalty but if you see the angle Wiley would have saw it from you can see how he could have mistakenly thought that Figueroa got the ball. The sending off you can't really argue with.

No one will argue with sending off. The penalty was as a clear cut penalty as is possible. Wat was the linesman doing? Pointing at planes?

 

[rickmcfc]

Cant really complain, should have have had a penalty & the game at 10 v's 10 but Zab was at fault for getting himselfed booked for the second (the first was a joke but one of their players was booked for a similar tackle on SWP), but a point at wigwam aintt going to get me weeping about the officials like a dipper or a rag, chavski would have liked that point and Wigwam beat villa at their place, so with half a team missing, I will settle for a point.

this is the most sensible thing anyone has said of this forum in the past 12 hours

 

[Billy City]

The penalty call was wrong, it should have been a penalty but if you see the angle Wiley would have saw it from you can see how he could have mistakenly thought that Figueroa got the ball. The sending off you can't really argue with.

What was the linesman doing then ? If the useless git had done his job right he should of flagged for the penalty.