Jump to content
oneBoro Forum
LukeR

'Other Boro stuff'

Recommended Posts

I can understand the referee missing it in real time. I find it harder to understand the assistant also missing it. I find it incomprehensible that repeated post-match viewing of that incident could deem it unworthy of retrospective punishment. That's not me being vindictive, but wild head-high studs damn well deserve censure.

Mogga is blinkered, but the Blackburn fans know what they saw. They were as sickened as we were at the time, when the result wasn't known. Personally, I want Branthwaite to learn from a potentially career ending mistake, not laugh it off and assume it's okay to endanger an opponent like that. God forbid, next time he does that, someone really might lose an eye.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RiseAgainst said:

I can understand the referee missing it in real time. I find it harder to understand the assistant also missing it. I find it incomprehensible that repeated post-match viewing of that incident could deem it unworthy of retrospective punishment. That's not me being vindictive, but wild head-high studs damn well deserve censure.

Mogga is blinkered, but the Blackburn fans know what they saw. They were as sickened as we were at the time, when the result wasn't known. Personally, I want Branthwaite to learn from a potentially career ending mistake, not laugh it off and assume it's okay to endanger an opponent like that. God forbid, next time he does that, someone really might lose an eye.

 

It's maddening, mate. One way or another, the system has *** up. Either the referee has seen it and reported it as a nothing incident and a goal-kick, so retrospective action can't be applied. Or it wasn't reported and they don't feel retrospective action should be applied. Neither of those outcomes is good enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, wilsoncgp said:

It's maddening, mate. One way or another, the system has *** up. Either the referee has seen it and reported it as a nothing incident and a goal-kick, so retrospective action can't be applied. Or it wasn't reported and they don't feel retrospective action should be applied. Neither of those outcomes is good enough.

Don’t get mad, it’s just one of those things, people see things in different ways. It would be a boring world if we all had the same opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is, as bad as the connection with Fry's face was, which is definitely why I'm still angry about it, that would have been a red card wherever it hit his body, anywhere on the pitch.

You can't make studs up challenges that connect in the modern game.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TeaCider24 said:

Thing is, as bad as the connection with Fry's face was, which is definitely why I'm still angry about it, that would have been a red card wherever it hit his body, anywhere on the pitch.

You can't make studs up challenges that connect in the modern game.

 

Especially not 6 foot in the air 🙂 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BillyWoofs_shinpad said:

Don’t get mad, it’s just one of those things, people see things in different ways. It would be a boring world if we all had the same opinion. 

The classic "woah people don't actually agree with me, better back out with the 'just an opinion bro' point"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

doesn't H&S state something along the lines of " by your actions or inactions cause harm or endanger a person" well this is Fry's work place and by not having awareness of his own actions in the vicinity of others he endangered a player. Red card, Penalty not violent conduct so no retrospective required.

the Ref should be the one receiving retrospective action for missing a blatantly dangerous act, when he is there to apply the laws and protect the players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, estonpidge said:

doesn't H&S state something along the lines of " by your actions or inactions cause harm or endanger a person" well this is Fry's work place and by not having awareness of his own actions in the vicinity of others he endangered a player. Red card, Penalty not violent conduct so no retrospective required.

the Ref should be the one receiving retrospective action for missing a blatantly dangerous act, when he is there to apply the laws and protect the players.

If the ref doesn't mention it in his report the FA can look at it violent conduct or no..If he deserves a red card on the day, and the three game ban that comes with it, why does he not deserve the 3 game ban after the fact?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, estonpidge said:

doesn't H&S state something along the lines of " by your actions or inactions cause harm or endanger a person" well this is Fry's work place and by not having awareness of his own actions in the vicinity of others he endangered a player. Red card, Penalty not violent conduct so no retrospective required.

the Ref should be the one receiving retrospective action for missing a blatantly dangerous act, when he is there to apply the laws and protect the players.

I could be wrong - I usually am - but I thought professional sportspeople and athletes were bound by different laws to us plebs. Or does H&S legislation designed to cover offices and factories still apply to footballers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Brunners said:

If the ref doesn't mention it in his report the FA can look at it violent conduct or no..If he deserves a red card on the day, and the three game ban that comes with it, why does he not deserve the 3 game ban after the fact?

It's not violent conduct though, it's dangerous play. Violent conduct needs to have perceived intent. I'm fairly sure dangerous play without intent only results in 1 or 2 game bans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Neverbefore said:

It's not violent conduct though, it's dangerous play. Violent conduct needs to have perceived intent. I'm fairly sure dangerous play without intent only results in 1 or 2 game bans. 

then he deserves the 1 or 2 game ban, whatever the red card would have given him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Neverbefore said:

It's not violent conduct though, it's dangerous play. Violent conduct needs to have perceived intent. I'm fairly sure dangerous play without intent only results in 1 or 2 game bans. 

Yeh, all reds that aren't violent conduct are 1 game bans as standard now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Brunners said:

then he deserves the 1 or 2 game ban, whatever the red card would have given him. 

He does but it's probably been put in the refs report as been seen as not endangering anyone as ridiculous as that is. The rules are dumb and we can have a whinge about it but this outcome really isn't surprising and I would have actually been more shocked to see something come of it. May as well just move on at this point and try to use it like mourinho would - they're all against us, let's show them what we can do kind of thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BillyWoofs_shinpad said:

The ref, the linesman, Mogga and the FA all came to the same conclusion as me, it was an accident which warranted no further action. It’s the hysterical fans on a forum who disagree. 

It's 'serious foul play'. If a player endangers the safety of another via his actions, whether it was intentional or not, its a red card. There's nothing more to it really. It is quite cut and dried.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to further clarify, the foot enters the 'endangering' position as soon as it goes above his waist, thus considered a 'high boot'. Which it does, thus Serious Foul Play, thus red card. There's no maybe about it, certainly not maybe a yellow, it's a red card offence.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Latest Posts

    • This to me feels very much like the Mowbray era of the type of job he asked to do, get rid of the big wages in players like  Britt for example bring in players who can do the same or better job for less and get competent coaching staff in who know what they are doing. I think personally Gibson trying to replicate the way he got promotion last time by getting someone in to balance the books and then have one big push towards promotion with the next manager.    If i am right, will that work? time will tell. 
    • Yeah,it still goes on,massive money changing hands there, Best of luck trying to drive past one on a narrow road,its like they own the rd & you have no business on it whatsoever, I tried it once and i threw it over a ditch!! Harder than it looks to follow to contours & falls on the rd.
    • As far as planning goes the Golden Thread was going to be how Boro would do things going forwards but the thought, logic and implementation of it was farcical. Gibson may (or may not) have wanted Pulis to stay on but it was impossible for Pulis to stay, there was already a Pulis out banner, social media meltdowns, inflatable dinosaurs and our season card sales were going down faster than Sunderland. That MFC are not very good at planning and that their Woodgate strategy (like Southgate) was flawed and amateurish beyond belief I think is a given. With a distinct lack of personnel changes in senior roles since at the club since (indeed one less) I doubt a new plan would have much more success. It is possibly better to have a wily astute manager who can source his own players via his own contacts etc. and set up a team to do what he believes will garner a promotion bid rather than try again to implement a new dawning under those given constraints and maybe to his credit SG has accepted that. The "personal circumstances" I think was pretty clear, people talk about Steve Gibson's lack of it yet you eloquently proved why he has far more of it than anyone on here. If it was that easy we would all be doing it and so would every Club in the country, I struggle why you failed to grasp that but then I have to admit that I struggle generally with a lot of your thought processes. I guess we are just wired differently. The "future" with any Championship Manager is around twelve months at best (I think the average is actually less) because the demand for instant success doesn't permit for longer. Fans inevitably get restless and want a new one and they want it now, or worse they didn't want him in the first place (Woodgate, Pulis, Monk etc. etc. just with ourselves). A plan with a particular style of football and type of playing personnel etc. is a great ideal and I'm not against it but that brings us back as to who implements the plan and for that and Boro see Woodgate and the Golden Thread. Steve Gibson has made many mistakes, some absolute howlers and his seemingly narcissistic style of control hasn't ingratiated himself very well with those under 45 years old (let alone those of us older) but if you think he is bad then I guess you didn't live through the Charlie Amer era. As Mogga would likely say "it is what it is". As fans we have two choices, get behind the team and make the best of it or walk away and watch Champions League on the telly instead of Championship at the Riverside on a cold wet Tuesday which is a typical Boro trait when times get tough. That's not a dig at anyone, I refused to renew my season card after Pulis and the Club hoped that myself and others would renew just on the basis that Pulis had gone, it worked for some but others held their nerve waiting to see who was the successor. When it was Woodgate I walked away for a multitude of reasons and that as much as anything was another reason why the announcement of his appointment was delayed for fear of losing even more Season card renewals. I have no doubt that some may decide to walk away now and if successful many will come back in time.
    • The Irish Tourist Board have a lot to answer for! Ive never seen a leprechaun, never wore an arran sweater, never said' Top of the morning' & i dont have a pig in the parlour,Then again if the Americans swollow up that rubbish,all the better.To be fair when i was about 8,i got my mam to cut up a bedsheet and sew it on to a Cork Gaa jersey.Hey Presto- The  White Boro Band- The only Boro shirt in Ireland!!  
    • I think he's exceeded expectations considering the amount of missed targets he had in the summer and injuries he's had to deal with. We are not far away to be honest we compete well in most games against 'promotion rivals', build our frontline to be more clinical and we could be right up there next season in my opinion.
×
×
  • Create New...