That was definitely a/never a red card

Well?

  • Stonewall red

    Votes: 27 40.9%
  • Definitely a yellow

    Votes: 25 37.9%
  • Yes, no, maybe

    Votes: 7 10.6%
  • He's Man U isn't he?

    Votes: 7 10.6%

  • Total voters
    66
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Cyclist33

Guest
Location
Warrington
Utterly boring debate as it was on the night when carried out by the local scrotes in the pub. In any event he *was* sent off and for a club to claim they lost a game specifically because of being a man down is to suggest that no team has ever gone on to win in such a situation.

Stu
 
OP
OP
swee'pea99

swee'pea99

Squire
for a club to claim they lost a game specifically because of being a man down is to suggest that no team has ever gone on to win in such a situation.
Is it? How so?
 
U

User482

Guest
Yes, my opinion on the debate and the ludicrousness of the post-match defeatism, not the decision itself.


This debate is about the decision. The thread title is a clue. If you find it boring, why not look at something else?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gaz

Yellow Fang

Legendary Member
Location
Reading
Isn't there something in the rules which says that the only offence where intent counts is handball. i.e. it does not matter if the player meant to commit the foul, just whether he did. Just because Michael Owen deliberately ran into an outstretched Argentine leg, it doesn't mean it's not a penalty. Does intent make a difference to whether it's a red or yellow card offence though? It's not like hockey where it's against the rules to lift the hockey stick above so high. It's not against the rules to lift your foot over waist height and accidents can happen.
 
Top Bottom