Methinks the protest are too loud

[0peteddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0]

It was a foul, we don''t condone cheats, we would never do it so rages player after player and the management team. 

We all know it goes on diving and cheating that is, some are more obvious than others, if there had been enough cameras a la Prem we would have a better view of Hucks swallow dive, went down a bit too easily, well Hucks does that the defender should have known he is rather good at it.

But the protests coming out of carrow Rd provide further evidence it was a soft penalty and D''Urso was conned, but it wasn''t a Drogbaesque poleaxing it was questionable thats all.  Get over it you won a soft penalty you probably won''t be as lucky next time.  But lets not have the voiceferous we would never di it, we expect you to do it until it is rightly outlawed keep doing it to them until they do it to you.

Getting platers sent off deliberately is another matter. 

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

It was a penalty Pete. I had a very good view from my seat and Hucks was going at speed and weaving so the clip on his right calf took him down. I also believe his intention was to go for goal first as he had the bit between his teeth at this stage of the game and effectively was winning the game on his own as the only player carrying the ball.

[Yellow Rages 0]

I would reply constructively but I don''t know what you just said.

Sort of like trying to have a conversation with Terry Wogan.

[Silver Canary 0]

The ref was on Worty''s side - if we hadn''t have got te penalty the protests would really have started. Things were warming up nicely in the Barclay and others would have joined us but for the dive.

[Rossi 0]

[quote user="Silver Canary"]The ref was on Worty''s side - if we hadn''t have got te penalty the protests would really have started. Things were warming up nicely in the Barclay and others would have joined us but for the dive.[/quote]

if this was the case silver, why did he bottle the two penalties in the first half?