Grendel
Well-Known Member
No Duffy said he had to take his word for it it was accidental. Come on if this was the other way round everyone would be screaming for a ban
What are you on about, even Duffy said after the match it was accidental! Presumably there will also be a charge for the assault on McNulty?
There's no way that if Duffy thinks he's being deliberately stamped on he's saying he's saying that after the game.No Duffy said he had to take his word for it it was accidental. Come on if this was the other way round everyone would be screaming for a ban
There's no way that if Duffy thinks he's being deliberately stamped on he's saying he's saying that after the game.
And don't put words into other peoples mouths. If it was a stamp I'd accept our player being banned and would expect an opponent to be banned but this was nothing like a stamp. There's no intent and no force.
In any case their players were happily dishing it out, you don't see Robins running to the FA complaining.
It Depends If there is intent, I really don't see that in his posture, looks totally clumsy to me.Nolan raised the issue with the FA - this is what people don’t seem to understand. It’s much much easier in live games - there’d cameras and media prescence everywhere so it’s always going to be looked at.
It was stupid he got caught out and that’s that. Treading on someone’s leg in a live game in front of a camera was plain dumb.
It's all well and good robins going on about being street wise, he should have reported things against us to get opposition players banned.
I mean through out the season.It doesn’t work like that - there were no incidents other than the one raised
I mean through out the season.
How is Nolan allowed to raise it? Looking at the FA website it says the referee can raise an issue he saw but without a clear view or the FA can raise things completely missed by the referee.Nolan raised the issue with the FA - this is what people don’t seem to understand.
So for that to apply treading on Duffy is nowhere near enough, it has to be excessive force.VIOLENT CONDUCT
Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
It doesn't matter.. It is still on video, it still happens. There could be something 10 times as bad on video but it's fine as it's not on tv. How does that work?Not live on TV
What does that have to do with anything? Its either on tape or its not.Not live on TV
How is Nolan allowed to raise it? Looking at the FA website it says the referee can raise an issue he saw but without a clear view or the FA can raise things completely missed by the referee.
It also says it has be for a sending off offence so the only one that applies is:
So for that to apply treading on Duffy is nowhere near enough, it has to be excessive force.
What does that have to do with anything? Its either on tape or its not.
The problem is he looks down before he places his foot there, I don't see anyway he won't be banned. I also can't think of anyone who has had a charge after a match and won the appeal - can anyone?It Depends If there is intent, I really don't see that in his posture, looks totally clumsy to me.
No Duffy said he had to take his word for it it was accidental. Come on if this was the other way round everyone would be screaming for a ban
Lincoln are quite good at challenging red cardsThe problem is he looks down before he places his foot there, I don't see anyway he won't be banned. I also can't think of anyone who has had a charge after a match and won the appeal - can anyone?
Yeah I take it all back, nailed on.The video is here, about 1m 10s in.
Coventry 1-1 Notts County
It's so blatant. He looks down and then stands on Duffy's leg. I don't see how he can avoid a ban.
So, we might as well appeal. He would miss Wembley anyway.Yeah I take it all back, nailed on.
Oh well .
Yeah I take it all back, nailed on.
Oh well .
Willis and Hyam. Hyam doesn't deserve to be dropped and McDonald has been very rocky of late.So if we assume he will be banned would you use one of Willis/McDonald with Hyam, or drop Hyam and use Willis and McDonald as a pair. I'd be inclined to play them both as I think they compliment eachother.
So if we assume he will be banned would you use one of Willis/McDonald with Hyam, or drop Hyam and use Willis and McDonald as a pair. I'd be inclined to play them both as I think they compliment eachother.
So, we might as well appeal. He would miss Wembley anyway.
I never said it wasn't.Agree it’s deliberate now?
You'd know if you just stepped on something, do it on a stone and you know, never mind someone's leg. If it was accidental, the instinct would be to turn around and have a look, especially with Duffy screaming. Davis was trying to pull a fast one and its backfired - Robins in a difficult place, can hardly be angry at people he wants to be "streetwise". Having said that, no appeal and it's admitting guilt.
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?