match thread *official lappinitup match thread Baggies V Canaries*

[howzer14 5]

4 minutes ago, king canary said:

Yeah exactly.

You can think the law is silly (I personally think dissent should be cracked down on hard but each to their own) but it isn't the referees fault for applying the law as it is now.

No but it is his fault when he then doesn't apply the rules, and I'm pretty sure (willing to be proved wrong) the foul he waved play on from so saw was a yellow and the fact a player asks (I've still seen no evidence of this btw) for a yellow doesn't negate the WBA player getting one for the foul? But I mean you have to feel sorry for the refs it a tough gig knowing when to apply the rules and when not to

 

[Ian 1,129]

Definitely should have been more yellows in that game, but Sainz can't complain at either.

Very stupid to do that gesture when you have just been booked, and hopefully he has apologised to his teammates. Difficult to say he cost us a point today, but I would have fancied us to at least score if we had 11 on the pitch.

PS. Thought Kenny was good at both CB and CM throughout today.

[canarydan23 4,060]

3 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

You are pointing out that King is wrong - I think that makes it three counts. I dare say he’ll soon be along to call you an idiot.

Will he be calling him an idiot in hindsight?

[Mason 47 1,379]

3 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

You are pointing out that King is wrong - I think that makes it three counts. I dare say he’ll soon be along to call you an idiot.

Oh, I don't necessarily know that KC is wrong, but I do disagree with the viewpoint.

And in fairness, I am a bit of an idiot.

[Branston Pickle 3,660]

7 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Will he be calling him an idiot in hindsight?

Are you sure that isn’t fundamentalism?

You appear to be nowhere near as clever as you think.

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Busy night on here compared to the 2-0 home win at home to Hudds.

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

3 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Busy night on here compared to the 2-0 home win at home to Hudds.

Do you think... there might be... some sort of correlation?

[RobJames 881]

25 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

He’s applied the law of the game as it stands and direction to referees how to apply it, whether that should be the law is a separate argument. 

eh  ?

Have another read "Cards should not be used for non football actions"

And it is NOT a law of the game. Refs have been urged to clamp down, that's all. There is NO law, unless you can point out a law. Here's a staring point

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules

[canarydan23 4,060]

7 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Are you sure that isn’t fundamentalism?

You appear to be nowhere near as clever as you think.

You might also want to look up irony as well after that 🤣

[cambridgeshire canary 6,724]

5 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Busy night on here compared to the 2-0 home win at home to Hudds.

It is always funny how much more slow and empty this board feels when we win

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

3 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Do you think... there might be... some sort of correlation?

Lemme think! 😄 

[Haus 259]

3 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

It is always funny how much more slow and empty this board feels when we win

People off having a drink or enjoying their evening probably.  People have more to say and debate  when things go wrong 

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,761]

Maybe his lack of English meant that he was trying to convey his point with hand gestures?

Either way, does every ref book every player who makes this gesture in every game the world over?

I will suspect not  ,the only ones that do are the sort of jobsworths who actively want to

[king canary 7,608]

22 minutes ago, howzer14 said:

No but it is his fault when he then doesn't apply the rules, and I'm pretty sure (willing to be proved wrong) the foul he waved play on from so saw was a yellow and the fact a player asks (I've still seen no evidence of this btw) for a yellow doesn't negate the WBA player getting one for the foul? But I mean you have to feel sorry for the refs it a tough gig knowing when to apply the rules and when not to

 

I largely think referees have a very tough gig and about 90% of the criticism comes from fans who are too one eyed to see their own bias. 

I think whether the foul was or wasn't a yellow is irrelevant. Dissent isn't decided on whether you're right or not, it's still dissent.

[RobJames 881]

20 minutes ago, howzer14 said:

No but it is his fault when he then doesn't apply the rules, and I'm pretty sure (willing to be proved wrong) the foul he waved play on from so saw was a yellow and the fact a player asks (I've still seen no evidence of this btw) for a yellow doesn't negate the WBA player getting one for the foul? But I mean you have to feel sorry for the refs it a tough gig knowing when to apply the rules and when not to

There was no rule here other than the foul by the WBA should have warranted a yellow card. However, that is down to the refs decision.

The myth being spread on this forum is that it is some new rule or law relating to what Sainz did

THERE IS NOT

Therefore the ref was under NO requirement to book Sainz for a non football action. More so given the known consequences of that yellow card.

[FenwayFrank 2,459]

 

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Dissent is probably the stupidest way to get a yellow card, and certainly the most ill-disciplined. Anyone can mistime a tackle on occasion, but it takes a special brand of idiocy to argue with the referee - AND ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'VE ALREADY HAD A YELLOW CARD.

[Monty13 2,235]

6 minutes ago, RobJames said:

eh  ?

Have another read "Cards should not be used for non football actions"

And it is NOT a law of the game. Refs have been urged to clamp down, that's all. There is NO law, unless you can point out a law. Here's a staring point

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules

Law 12 

CAUTIONABLE OFFENCES

A player is cautioned if guilty of

• dissent by word or action

That was hard

[littleyellowbirdie 2,551]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

I largely think referees have a very tough gig and about 90% of the criticism comes from fans who are too one eyed to see their own bias. 

I think whether the foul was or wasn't a yellow is irrelevant. Dissent isn't decided on whether you're right or not, it's still dissent.

That's fine fans taking a phlegmatic cut and dry approach to it if the referees consistently take a cut and dry approach as you're presenting it, but they don't, which puts the referee firmly in the spotlight as to why they decided to act on that occasion and so radically alter the game as a result.

Edited December 26, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[king canary 7,608]

27 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

You are pointing out that King is wrong - I think that makes it three counts. I dare say he’ll soon be along to call you an idiot.

Wasn't planning to as his point actually has some merit unlike your nonsense.

[king canary 7,608]

1 minute ago, FenwayFrank said:

 

This is a great example of this referee being consistent, which is apparently all anyone is asking for. So I expect several apologies to him soon...

 

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 minute ago, king canary said:

This is a great example of this referee being consistent, which is apparently all anyone is asking for. So I expect several apologies to him soon...

 

It does prove he's a traffic warden style ****.

[canarydan23 4,060]

6 minutes ago, RobJames said:

There was no rule here other than the foul by the WBA should have warranted a yellow card. However, that is down to the refs decision.

The myth being spread on this forum is that it is some new rule or law relating to what Sainz did

THERE IS NOT

Therefore the ref was under NO requirement to book Sainz for a non football action. More so given the known consequences of that yellow card.

So you're saying Sainz could have given the w@nker sign and escaped punishment?

I need to revisit a couple of my Sunday League fines...

Edited December 26, 2023 by canarydan23

[pete 319]

Lots of part time referees on here are calling the Albion player brandishing a card and therefore should havde been duly booked, can't comment wasn't there.  Perhaps he did but maybe it wasn't in the referres face as was shown on SSN at the time.  Maybe the ref failed to see but he certainly couldn't fail to see Sainz.

[RobJames 881]

Just now, Monty13 said:

Law 12 

CAUTIONABLE OFFENCES

A player is cautioned if guilty of

• dissent by word or action

That was hard

As stated, it is subjective not absolute, as being claimed on here.

Sending someone off in those circumstances was not proportionate, and had he merely 'lectured' Sainz there was no rule broken.

If all refs took the action, you are suggesting the game would be a six a side game with the first half.

He made the wrong decision.

 

 

[Ian 1,129]

Wonder if all these people making excuses for Sainz would also be making excuses for Kenny or Idah had they done the same thing?

🤔

[RobJames 881]

4 minutes ago, king canary said:

This is a great example of this referee being consistent, which is apparently all anyone is asking for. So I expect several apologies to him soon.

What an absurd comment.

[RobJames 881]

Just now, Ian said:

Wonder if all these people making excuses for Sainz would also be making excuses for Kenny or Idah had they done the same thing?

🤔

No one is making excuses for Sainz. Stop making up stuff.

[Ian 1,129]

1 minute ago, RobJames said:

No one is making excuses for Sainz. Stop making up stuff.

So nobody has said it was poor refereeing/harsh/the wrong decision/not a yellow card offence then?

Edited December 26, 2023 by Ian

[RobJames 881]

4 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

So you're saying Sainz could have given the w@nker sign and escaped punishment?

I need to revisit a couple of my Sunday League fines...

No I am saying what I posted. The clue is the words in my post.