Jump to content

DMax399

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    2,169
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DMax399

  • Rank
    Star Player

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Midlothian

Recent Profile Visitors

2,897 profile views
  1. They know that they’re both out the door at the end off the season. Between now and then they are just carrying the can. Wonderful stuff.
  2. RB is probably the easiest position to play. I’m not sure we need to bring someone in to be honest. Balogun strolled it during the week, and even managed to push forward on a few occasions.
  3. How far do we have to get to have automatic entry to the CL group stage?
  4. I’m with you. 80 odd pages of speculation here that I’ve avoided commenting on because in truth, none of us know what happened or what will be the outcome.
  5. Sometimes the past is better. The game now has been diluted and is regularly re-refereed to impose unnecessary punishments. Not for me. But each to their own.
  6. McGregor endangered the safety of our player when he stood on him in the Hibs game mate if that’s the case and had a Yellow given. That’s where the system fails regularly in my opinion. Another example was when our CB (whose name escapes me) had his nose broken by the arm of a Motherwell player. Yellow card only. Clearly the ref thought he had done wrong to card him and he caused actual damage, but no Red.. Too many inconsistencies to just roll over and accept a ban on this occasion in my opinion.
  7. Intent is mentioned regularly, so is potential to injure which is all very well. But there was a time when cards were dished out for what you actually did not what people thought you intended to do or could have potentially done. He was given a Yellow which was adequate by a referee who was less than 10 yards away. Trial by TV has yet again allowed events to be re-refereed. Even if I disagree with the decision, which I don’t, the takeaway from this and the Morelos ban is clearly that our Referees are not up to standard as both incidents were seen during the games and no Red issued. Just
  8. But the intent to injure someone with that air swipe was there for everyone to see.... One of the most ridiculous decisions ever in this country but hardly an eyelid batted at the time.
  9. Mate, everyone has their opinion. It’s just not a Red in mine. Zero intent was shown to injure him, and every effort was made to back in and block him. Yes the boy took a hit, but no way did Roofe set out to do him.
  10. He’s tried to get his body in the way, and block him. People talk all the time now about intent, which I find strange unless you can read minds but let’s go along with it for now. Yes he gave him a sore one, but there was zero intent to injure him and simply therefore it’s not a Red.
  11. Anyone who seems that a Red has no idea what they are talking about. Simple as that.
  12. Not willingly. But I’ll bet he does leave.
  13. We shouldn’t be surprised. Take the ban, let them have their little victory and the hurt them in the best way possible by winning the league and cup.
  14. Sky commentary typically focussing on a single incident, where they have already decided it should have been a Red for AM, and have also decided that retrospective action by the Compliant officer should also be taken. Get over it you weasels....
×
×
  • Create New...