steve cooper
Well-Known Member
He hasn't been found guilty yet,
He hasn't been found guilty yet,Punishment worth it 100% , we got ahead and went on to decimate them ..
Good lad , feet up and a beer
He hasn't been found guilty yet,
Fulham's thoughts on the FA investigation: Coventry striker
what a bunch of nobsFulham's thoughts on the FA investigation: Coventry striker
Are you forgetting TavaresLet's be honest , Fulham will have won penalties before from blatant dives , its basically football 101 in the box , anticipate contact and go down ..
The ref gave it , whatever happens to godden from here happens , we have 3 other strikers to cover for now .
+3 points is all that matters
Brilliant.There was contact on that one though.
The defence for Godden is pretty straightforward imo. He never appealed for a penalty, he saw the leg come out, anticipated contact & avoided it, fearing risk of injury.
And tavares sorryAre you forgetting Tavares
Of course it's right. The 2 game ban is for actually conning the ref into giving us a penalty, unlike a real time yellow for attempting to con him and failing. Are the rules applied consistently and fairly? No. But we won, the points are ours and we have plenty of time to focus on Blackburn without Godden.So if he's caught he gets booked, but if he doesn't 2 game ban. That can't be right.
Yes we had the benefit, but as has been pointed out not only the Luton pen that want but in the same fulham game their opener gets turned over
Totally different. He was running into the box. I think this is the right decision but they need to be consistent and tackle all of these incidents where players have clearly dived. Obviously I was pleased we got the penalty but it was clearly cheating. Adebayo wasn't cheating. The ref just got that one wrong.What about Adebayo (or whatever he's called), when he threw himself with a swan dive into our penalty area from a yard outside? Not being funny, but how many of these have been shown on the box, yet nothing done. I don't mind them doing it, provided they are consistent about it.
Agreed. Literally their word against his isn’t it? It’s not like some dives where there was literally no attempt for contact either - he can justifiably say he saw the leg come out and jumped to avoid itThere was contact on that one though.
The defence for Godden is pretty straightforward imo. He never appealed for a penalty, he saw the leg come out, anticipated contact & avoided it, fearing risk of injury.
Agreed. Literally their word against his isn’t it? It’s not like some dives where there was literally no attempt for contact either - he can justifiably say he saw the leg come out and jumped to avoid it
It’s quite possible to dive without appealing for it. In fact that probably helped his causeJust a feckin joke, Godden never asked for it, got up to play on, ref was directly in line with it, and lino both gave it so how does Godden get done for their decision. Mitrovic was strangling McFadz and pushing him off balance so will that be looked at as violent conduct? I don't bloody think so. Fulham expected to romp home and can't take a fucking over, so go crying to FA.
E3
E3.1 A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.
E3.2 A breach of Rule E3.1 is an “Aggravated Breach” where it includes a reference, whether express or implied, to any one or more of the following :- ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, religion or belief, gender, gender reassignment, sexual orientation or disability.
E3.3 Where an Aggravated Breach of Rule E3.1 is committed in youth football by a Player aged under 12, no disciplinary charge will be brought. In such cases, the Player will be subject to an education programme, the details of which will be provided to the Player by The Association.
E3.4 Where two or more Participants from a Club commit any Aggravated Breach of Rule E3.1 in any twelve month period, regardless of whether any such breach falls within sub-paragraph E3.4, the Club itself will be liable to a sanction imposed by a Regulatory Commission.
Fuck em. Mitrovic pushing Fadz four yards to force the og header balances it outFulham's thoughts on the FA investigation: Coventry striker
That will please some of the posters on this thread then.Charged by the FA
How many of those 4 are household names playing for big clubs?Fine, take it on the chin and move on.
I hope the club has someone going through the footage of all of our upcoming opponents and submitting to the FA all season from now on then.
Apparently this is only the 4th time this has happened. Watch match of the day and there are twice as many dives like this a week. The inconsistency of it all is a joke.
It wouldn’t because they use VAR.How many of those 4 are household names playing for big clubs?
It stinks of double standards and if we feel any injustice now god help us all if we get to the premier league because it’ll be 10 times worse.
It does and will help a bit but it still isn’t always used properly and the big clubs still seem to get the rub of the green with it.It wouldn’t because they use VAR.
I see your point, a bit like England v Denmark.It does and will help a bit but it still isn’t always used properly and the big clubs still seem to get the rub of the green with it.
How many of those 4 are household names playing for big clubs?
It stinks of double standards and if we feel any injustice now god help us all if we get to the premier league because it’ll be 10 times worse.
They were conned Nick - come on get on message. They didn’t make a mistake, godden conned them and as he’s such a naughty boy he deserves to miss 2 games just as he’s got in the teamWhy didn't the Lino spot it and will he be banned?
Inconsistent application, but it was a dive and deserves the ban. Albeit I’m still buying Le God a pint.
Why should he get a ban rather than a retrospective booking?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?