Fat Buddha CBEIt’s a bit “physician, heal thysef” though. How often do the media call out cheats? Was there ever any criticism of Smith and Grealish at Vile for instance?
SpikeFat Buddha CBE
That article is good, fine and overdue - the only mystery is how he fails to mention the king of all cheats. Perhaps it's because he can hardly get a game for Man City nowadays?
And written by a lifelong West Ham fan so perhaps lacking in objectivity.
Fat Buddha CBE
Why is contact in quotation marks in the article? That wasn’t a waft of wind Gordon felt.
I remember when we got a penalty in some game when Larson got us a penalty by getting between the keeper and a ball in the air, taking the hit. Don’t remember much dissent on here about it being unfair because Seb had blocked the keeper’s path to the ball.
Quite simple really. When an attacker goes down from getting their body in the way in the box, are they actually in a position to play/control the ball, or are they 'initiating contact'?
Getting your body between the keeper and the ball to challenge with it is smart, brave play. Gordon's challenge for the second ball gets nowhere near it and causes the two players to collide. That's why, for me, it is the wrong decision.
IstanblueTbf what caused them to collide was Phillips kicking him the dozy sodQuite simple really. When an attacker goes down from getting their body in the way in the box, are they actually in a position to play/control the ball, or are they 'initiating contact'?
Getting your body between the keeper and the ball to challenge with it is smart, brave play. Gordon's challenge for the second ball gets nowhere near it and causes the two players to collide. That's why, for me, it is the wrong decision.
Fat Buddha CBE
Why is contact in quotation marks in the article? That wasn’t a waft of wind Gordon felt.
I remember when we got a penalty in some game when Larson got us a penalty by getting between the keeper and a ball in the air, taking the hit. Don’t remember much dissent on here about it being unfair because Seb had blocked the keeper’s path to the ball.
You (and Rab and Ian T) were wrong about this ealier in the thread, and you're wrong about it now. After being proven so wrong i can't believe you are coming back to emphasise your mistakes.
Perhaps taking a bit of time out, reading the comments here, re-watchig the clips, reading the laws of the game, listening to ex referees and players without agendas will help
IstanblueTbf what caused them to collide was Phillips kicking him the dozy sodQuite simple really. When an attacker goes down from getting their body in the way in the box, are they actually in a position to play/control the ball, or are they 'initiating contact'?
Getting your body between the keeper and the ball to challenge with it is smart, brave play. Gordon's challenge for the second ball gets nowhere near it and causes the two players to collide. That's why, for me, it is the wrong decision.
There was only contact because Gordon put himself in the way of an already swinging leg - deliberately.
Players have ‘bought’ fouls from time immemorial. Shearer used to do it all the time. One classic (perpetrated by many) was to move towards the ball and stop, inviting your marker to run into you - attacking free kick to be put in the box. Result.
The flicking your leg out to catch the defenders leg is a relatively new one and can pretty easily be determined in my view. I don’t think Gordon’s falls into that category, albeit he was gaming the situation.
RagsGordon is allowed to deliberately do what he did. Phillips wasn’t allowed to not pull out of his attempt to kick the ball which resulted in him fouling Gordon. Clear penalty. As per the laws of the gameIstanblueTbf what caused them to collide was Phillips kicking him the dozy sodQuite simple really. When an attacker goes down from getting their body in the way in the box, are they actually in a position to play/control the ball, or are they 'initiating contact'?
Getting your body between the keeper and the ball to challenge with it is smart, brave play. Gordon's challenge for the second ball gets nowhere near it and causes the two players to collide. That's why, for me, it is the wrong decision.
There was only contact because Gordon put himself in the way of an already swinging leg - deliberately.
RagsFat Buddha CBE
Why is contact in quotation marks in the article? That wasn’t a waft of wind Gordon felt.
I remember when we got a penalty in some game when Larson got us a penalty by getting between the keeper and a ball in the air, taking the hit. Don’t remember much dissent on here about it being unfair because Seb had blocked the keeper’s path to the ball.
You (and Rab and Ian T) were wrong about this ealier in the thread, and you're wrong about it now. After being proven so wrong i can't believe you are coming back to emphasise your mistakes.
Perhaps taking a bit of time out, reading the comments here, re-watchig the clips, reading the laws of the game, listening to ex referees and players without agendas will help
Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.
If it wasn’t you Rags I’d feel patronised. Player ‘with agendas’ 😁
RagsFat Buddha CBE
Why is contact in quotation marks in the article? That wasn’t a waft of wind Gordon felt.
I remember when we got a penalty in some game when Larson got us a penalty by getting between the keeper and a ball in the air, taking the hit. Don’t remember much dissent on here about it being unfair because Seb had blocked the keeper’s path to the ball.
You (and Rab and Ian T) were wrong about this ealier in the thread, and you're wrong about it now. After being proven so wrong i can't believe you are coming back to emphasise your mistakes.
Perhaps taking a bit of time out, reading the comments here, re-watchig the clips, reading the laws of the game, listening to ex referees and players without agendas will help
Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.
If it wasn’t you Rags I’d feel patronised. Player ‘with agendas’ 😁
"If it wasn’t you Rags I’d feel patronised."
Shit - must try harder