Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2011 13:02:04 GMT 1
Is Darren Deadman,
Remember him?
Port Vale
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Nov 4, 2011 13:06:10 GMT 1
Also the referee who used common sense not to book Billy Sharp on Tuesday evening when he off his shirt for his tribute to his son who passed away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2011 13:11:02 GMT 1
Any referee human would not have booked billy sharp on tuesday, the fact is this referee came to shrewsbury and bottled it because the vale fans were threatning to riot.
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Nov 4, 2011 13:12:35 GMT 1
Any referee human would not have booked billy sharp on tuesday, the fact is this referee came to shrewsbury and bottled it because the vale fans were threatning to riot. Many referees would have booked Sharp, purely because they would have been scared of being marked down by their assesors. Deadman isn't the best referee I have ever seen, but why are we even getting worried by that before the game has even started?!
|
|
|
Post by pughywasfree on Nov 4, 2011 13:19:43 GMT 1
it just says the state of refs in our league that we have to get worried about them because they affect the game so much by poor discisions
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Nov 4, 2011 13:23:04 GMT 1
I always get my Darren's mixed-up, Deadman and Drysdale. Both s**t
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Nov 4, 2011 13:23:12 GMT 1
it just says the state of refs in our league that we have to get worried about them because they affect the game so much by poor discisions If we are better than the team we are playing then the referee will have little effect on the outcome of a game.
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Nov 4, 2011 13:28:22 GMT 1
I don't very often feel I have to disagree with you El Mundo but for the ref not to book Richards for his foul on Luke Daniels (16 stitches in his face) and to allow the goal to stand was I fear (and only in my opinion) dreadful and did affect the result of the match. Definitely not my most favourite ref!
However, the common sense shown the other night might well mean that the ref and his decisions have matured since then - let's hope so and move onwards and upwards tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Nov 4, 2011 13:33:31 GMT 1
I don't very often feel I have to disagree with you El Mundo but for the ref not to book Richards for his foul on Luke Daniels (16 stitches in his face) and to allow the goal to stand was I fear (and only in my opinion) dreadful and did affect the result of the match. Definitely not my most favourite ref! However, the common sense shown the other night might well mean that the ref and his decisions have matured since then - let's hope so and move onwards and upwards tomorrow. Yes, the Port Vale game is obviously an exception, but over the 100's and 100's of games that we have all seen Shrewsbury Town play, if we looked at it totally objectively, I bet the referee hardly ever has a major effect on the result of the game.
|
|
|
Post by pughywasfree on Nov 4, 2011 13:36:32 GMT 1
it just says the state of refs in our league that we have to get worried about them because they affect the game so much by poor discisions If we are better than the team we are playing then the referee will have little effect on the outcome of a game. i disagree if we have a poor ref it makes our task alot harder
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Nov 4, 2011 13:39:39 GMT 1
Football is a game of 'what if's
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Nov 4, 2011 13:46:12 GMT 1
If we are better than the team we are playing then the referee will have little effect on the outcome of a game. i disagree if we have a poor ref it makes our task alot harder Why? If we are a better team than the opposition, we should/would beat the opposition regardless, surely? The only way the referee would make that much of a difference is if they gave EVERYTHING to the opposition and I have never seen that ever!
|
|
|
Post by pughywasfree on Nov 4, 2011 13:52:41 GMT 1
i disagree if we have a poor ref it makes our task alot harder Why? If we are a better team than the opposition, we should/would beat the opposition regardless, surely? The only way the referee would make that much of a difference is if they gave EVERYTHING to the opposition and I have never seen that ever! take last weekend the ref was wistle happy never let the game flow and gave some dodgy disicsions which imo helped the game result in a 0-0 draw
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Nov 4, 2011 14:00:34 GMT 1
Why? If we are a better team than the opposition, we should/would beat the opposition regardless, surely? The only way the referee would make that much of a difference is if they gave EVERYTHING to the opposition and I have never seen that ever! take last weekend the ref was wistle happy never let the game flow and gave some dodgy disicsions which imo helped the game result in a 0-0 draw Nothing to do with the fact we were not good enough to break down AFC Wimbledon's effective defence?
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Nov 4, 2011 14:03:45 GMT 1
Refs make mistakes and have bad games as do players but the general majority of supporters will blame the ref as they feel no loyalty or emotional attachment to him.
The frustration is when player X misses an easy chance then fair enough his fault, but if the ref doesn't award a clear penalty that is something that has gone against you that you are unable to control, which is where the annoyance comes from.
|
|
|
Post by Ned on Nov 4, 2011 14:33:16 GMT 1
Got a lot of respect for Deadman after what he did the other night.
I agree with Sam. Fact is that if we'd stopped Richards being one-on-one with the goalkeeper, then the referee wouldn't have had the chance to make a decision.
|
|
|
Post by Fingers on Nov 4, 2011 15:42:06 GMT 1
Got a lot of respect for Deadman after what he did the other night. I agree with Sam. Fact is that if we'd stopped Richards being one-on-one with the goalkeeper, then the referee wouldn't have had the chance to make a decision. Not saying whether it's right or wrong but why book Ballotelli, Scharner etc and not book Sharp? Rules are Rules regardless aren't they?
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Nov 4, 2011 15:44:39 GMT 1
Got a lot of respect for Deadman after what he did the other night. I agree with Sam. Fact is that if we'd stopped Richards being one-on-one with the goalkeeper, then the referee wouldn't have had the chance to make a decision. Not saying whether it's right or wrong but why book Ballotelli, Scharner etc and not book Sharp? Rules are Rules regardless aren't they? Rules might be rules, but to have booked Sharp on Tuesday would have been a disgrace, even though he should have. The same goes for Jordan Ibe of Wycombe, scored his first professional goal at the age of 15 and celebrated by hugging his family, got booked. Common sense should be used when applying rules.
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Nov 4, 2011 15:45:45 GMT 1
Got a lot of respect for Deadman after what he did the other night. I agree with Sam. Fact is that if we'd stopped Richards being one-on-one with the goalkeeper, then the referee wouldn't have had the chance to make a decision. So applying that logic it was our fault that Wycombe scored as we didn't properly clear the ball? You shouldn't have to prevent refs making decisions just out of fear they'll get them wrong.
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Nov 4, 2011 16:04:04 GMT 1
Also not only did the Port Vale decision affect the result of the game surely the tackle could have been construed as dangerous play. Presumably had the kick been a bit higher we could have been talking about Luke Daniels eyes.
And please don't get me started about the Wycombe game - I've had more than my say about that on here.
|
|
|
Post by Fingers on Nov 4, 2011 16:18:34 GMT 1
Not saying whether it's right or wrong but why book Ballotelli, Scharner etc and not book Sharp? Rules are Rules regardless aren't they? Rules might be rules, but to have booked Sharp on Tuesday would have been a disgrace, even though he should have. The same goes for Jordan Ibe of Wycombe, scored his first professional goal at the age of 15 and celebrated by hugging his family, got booked. Common sense should be used when applying rules. Great contradiction! I do not see how revealing a T-Shirt or hugging family should constitute a booking in any case - it seems FIFA want to take emotion out of football. The problem is rules are rules and all players should be treated equally.
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Nov 4, 2011 16:32:33 GMT 1
Rules might be rules, but to have booked Sharp on Tuesday would have been a disgrace, even though he should have. The same goes for Jordan Ibe of Wycombe, scored his first professional goal at the age of 15 and celebrated by hugging his family, got booked. Common sense should be used when applying rules. Great contradiction! I do not see how revealing a T-Shirt or hugging family should constitute a booking in any case - it seems FIFA want to take emotion out of football. The problem is rules are rules and all players should be treated equally. I really wasn't very clear. I actually fully agree with you, that rules are rules but the rules are crap! Therefore, in my idealistic world of rules, Sharp and Ibe wouldn't have been booked!
|
|
|
Post by ferkle94 on Nov 4, 2011 16:51:29 GMT 1
Came home to see a reasonably big thread on a ref... I thought it might have been Mr. Linnington!
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on Nov 4, 2011 16:56:01 GMT 1
Not yet ...................................... but I'm sure his day will come ...........................
|
|
|
Post by ferkle94 on Nov 4, 2011 16:57:51 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on Nov 4, 2011 17:48:28 GMT 1
Got a lot of respect for Deadman after what he did the other night. I agree with Sam. Fact is that if we'd stopped Richards being one-on-one with the goalkeeper, then the referee wouldn't have had the chance to make a decision. What a load of s**t that is! [img src="http://www.shropshire.btinternet.co.uk/smiley/ www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/mad/mad0223.gif"].gif[/img] The ref is 'trained' and paid to make decisions and get them right! That time he didn't! Re Drysdale, ain't he the Vale fan anyway?! Seen both good and bad games from both of them. We await tomorrow to find out, or not in Ned's case...
|
|
|
Post by Liam on Nov 4, 2011 17:55:23 GMT 1
Great contradiction! I do not see how revealing a T-Shirt or hugging family should constitute a booking in any case - it seems FIFA want to take emotion out of football. The problem is rules are rules and all players should be treated equally. I really wasn't very clear. I actually fully agree with you, that rules are rules but the rules are cr@p! Therefore, in my idealistic world of rules, Sharp and Ibe wouldn't have been booked! On the whole, fans and media pundits tend to demand two things of referees: "consistency" and "common sense." What cases like Sharp and Ibe show is that these two things are mutually exclusive - you literally can't be 100% consistent with the rules at the same time as applying your discretionary take on the rules in a common sense manner! Basically, they can't win, and fans and pundits need to make up their minds which of these two things it is they actually want, rather than demanding both. Back on topic, and on every occaision I've seen Deadman he's applied neither consistency nor common sense - a p**s-poor official, imho.
|
|
|
Post by Fingers on Nov 4, 2011 17:58:32 GMT 1
Great contradiction! I do not see how revealing a T-Shirt or hugging family should constitute a booking in any case - it seems FIFA want to take emotion out of football. The problem is rules are rules and all players should be treated equally. I really wasn't very clear. I actually fully agree with you, that rules are rules but the rules are cr@p! Therefore, in my idealistic world of rules, Sharp and Ibe wouldn't have been booked! I totally agree.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2011 19:46:22 GMT 1
I must be in a minority of 1, I remember the Richards/Daniels tackle, I personally feel that it was a 50/50 ball and both players went for the ball, Daniels injury was very unfortunate, but if had been the other end and it was our striker and there keeper, then there would be a different outlook.
The injury to Daniels was horrific, however I think it was not malicious and was a sporting injury!!
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Nov 4, 2011 19:50:17 GMT 1
I must be in a minority of 1, I remember the Richards/Daniels tackle, I personally feel that it was a 50/50 ball and both players went for the ball, Daniels injury was very unfortunate, but if had been the other end and it was our striker and there keeper, then there would be a different outlook. The injury to Daniels was horrific, however I think it was not malicious and was a sporting injury!! Erm no there wouldn't be a different outlook as Gornell vs Hereford proved
|
|