Lavery Appeal Rejected

Wizaard said:
Even Thompson's first booking was caused by the failure of the ref to stop the game with Bridcutt's head injury. If he followed the current rules, then Thompson isn't reacting to the perceived injustice.
Click to expand...
What injustice? The ref never got anything wrong. They never get anything wrong. He didn't see it. Which means he didn't get it wrong, it just took him a little bit longer to get it right. ,A long with the linesman. Who was definitely looking straight at it, because if he wasn't he wasn't doing his job. Along with the ref. ** wankers. I think the only way I would get over this is to **..... I can't compete the sentence. Wankers. ** wankers.
 
Thornton_Pool said:
A lesson to be learnt if Thompson had collapsed after the push into the hoarding and Maxwell had gone to ground after the assault by the Scottish thug would the ref had taken different decisions?
Click to expand...
Maxwell did go to ground but got up again. That decision cost him the additional yard he needed to be able to save the shot.
 
JJpool said:
Typical from the bunch of cunts, FA and EFL all cut from the same cloth.

Useless bastards, not fit for purpose.

Where's the violent conduct?

Tossers are probably happy when there's incidents so they get the fine money.

Clueless.

Would have liked to see BFC express their disgust in the statement at the decision.

About time clubs and fans started standing up to this bullshit.
Click to expand...
Including refusing to pay any fines imposed.,
 
The Sheff U story is that Lavery grabbed their keepers shirt and pulled him down to the ground on top of him. Is there even a video that shows the full thing?, even if he did pull his shirt a straight red is very harsh.
 
Philbfctrois said:
Yep its true ..

Referee caused a riot as the ref did at my lads game

Very little difference
Click to expand...
The ref didn’t cause a riot.

It was the childish and pathetic reaction of the players, which resulted in a minor case of handbags.

Us (again) failing to control our players and our collective tempers.

Dom Thompson essentially handing over the initiative to the opposition with two moments of utter strupidity.
 
Wizaard said:
Even Thompson's first booking was caused by the failure of the ref to stop the game with Bridcutt's head injury. If he followed the current rules, then Thompson isn't reacting to the perceived injustice.
Click to expand...
Sorry Wiz, but Dom Thompson’s first booking was caused by a ridiculous over-reaction by Thompson and aggressive behaviour towards the ref and an opposition player.

Bridcut was down momentarily and the ref misjudged the situation, but that doesn’t excuse the OTT reaction from Thompson…
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Sorry Wiz, but Dom Thompson’s first booking was caused by a ridiculous over-reaction by Thompson and aggressive behaviour towards the ref and an opposition player.

Bridcut was down momentarily and the ref misjudged the situation, but that doesn’t excuse the OTT reaction from Thompson…
Click to expand...
But the the referee caused all this by being proper shit

Cause and effect
 
Joking aside, that's probably the fastest the EFL has ever responded to anything in its life.
Of course, it's a Blackpool player and they want to make sure the ban starts as quick as possible
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Sorry Wiz, but Dom Thompson’s first booking was caused by a ridiculous over-reaction by Thompson and aggressive behaviour towards the ref and an opposition player.

Bridcut was down momentarily and the ref misjudged the situation, but that doesn’t excuse the OTT reaction from Thompson…
Click to expand...
Bridcut was down for ages. Ref practically stepped over him to walk away.
 
This sport in the PL/EFL is on it's knees in terms of refereeing standards. Having said that, I wouldn't fancy it myself - thankless task.
 
Wizaard said:
Maxwell did go to ground but got up again. That decision cost him the additional yard he needed to be able to save the shot.
Click to expand...
The point I was trying to make if Maxwell had used a little gamesmen ship and stayed down the 'dodgy' just might have blown for a foul
 
Agree with Newbury. Whoever it is has heard the appeal should have to provide feedback on their decision.

I don't know the process, but I assume we've submitted our view of the incident and why we don't think it justified a red. In that case the appeal tribunal should have to provide a detailed response on why they disagree. I'm sure they do to the club, but it would save a lot of conjecture if the feedback was made public.
 
CGP1 said:
Agree with Newbury. Whoever it is has heard the appeal should have to provide feedback on their decision.

I don't know the process, but I assume we've submitted our view of the incident and why we don't think it justified a red. In that case the appeal tribunal should have to provide a detailed response on why they disagree. I'm sure they do to the club, but it would save a lot of conjecture if the feedback was made public.
Click to expand...
The only question we should be asking ourselves is why we can’t manage to get through a high energy exciting game without it resulting in a 20 man brawl and red cards / suspensions.
 
Yes we should. But that's ourselves, internally.

But when you ask someone to explain something, you're entitled to a polite response. That's my view at least. In this instance, that's us saying to the FA or EFL or whoever it was that we don't agree. I'm sure they provide the club with their reasons, IMHO that feedback should be made public.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top