Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:07 pm
Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:55 pm
Tue Oct 09, 2018 2:16 pm
davids wrote:Interesting what he says about the fourth official.
My own feeling when the ref changed his mind from yellow to red was that either the linesman or the fourth official had said something in his earpiece which made him show a red instead of a yellow.
Regardless of that, Kane should not have run over and put his arms around Ralls in the way he did.
Having said all that, my own opinion for what it's worth is that it was a red and Ralls was stupid in the extreme to do what he did.
Tue Oct 09, 2018 2:30 pm
Tue Oct 09, 2018 2:44 pm
montyblue wrote:Kane is not the ref its his decision, so his argument falls on its arse he said nothing about running into bang into ralls and try and provoke ralls plain and simple for everybody to see trying to bring attention to the ref i 100% agree with warnocks statement about what kane was trying to do he also said ralls kicked him i thought he put his leg infront of the cry baby like obstruction but the question is what the f..k is kane sticking his rather large nose in for he was not trying to pull 2 players apart he was running over to confront ralls and that's what neil is referring to
Tue Oct 09, 2018 3:14 pm
Tue Oct 09, 2018 3:34 pm
T1JMO wrote:Ralls clearly took him out with no intention of playing the ball - it's a red for me. Kane deserved the yellow too for his reaction. I don't think we will get it overturned either.
Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:18 pm
Forever Blue wrote:T1JMO wrote:Ralls clearly took him out with no intention of playing the ball - it's a red for me. Kane deserved the yellow too for his reaction. I don't think we will get it overturned either.
Thats exactly how I see the whole situation.
Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:26 pm
T1JMO wrote:Ralls clearly took him out with no intention of playing the ball - it's a red for me. Kane deserved the yellow too for his reaction. I don't think we will get it overturned either.
Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:27 pm
T1JMO wrote:Ralls clearly took him out with no intention of playing the ball - it's a red for me. Kane deserved the yellow too for his reaction. I don't think we will get it overturned either.
Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:40 pm
dogfound wrote:T1JMO wrote:Ralls clearly took him out with no intention of playing the ball - it's a red for me. Kane deserved the yellow too for his reaction. I don't think we will get it overturned either.
if this no intention to play the ball thing means a red card the rule needs changing.
Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:44 pm
pembroke allan wrote:dogfound wrote:T1JMO wrote:Ralls clearly took him out with no intention of playing the ball - it's a red for me. Kane deserved the yellow too for his reaction. I don't think we will get it overturned either.
if this no intention to play the ball thing means a red card the rule needs changing.
trouble is even if someone attempts to play ball and misses its same result its the intent and the intent was to stop him not get the ball! and its the manner ralls made the tackle thats made it a red , you can go in 2 footed and miss player but its still a red card offence because of the intent, plus of course the refs interpretation of the foul one refs red is anothers yellow same with all decisions
Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:45 pm
Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:50 pm
pembroke allan wrote:dogfound wrote:T1JMO wrote:Ralls clearly took him out with no intention of playing the ball - it's a red for me. Kane deserved the yellow too for his reaction. I don't think we will get it overturned either.
if this no intention to play the ball thing means a red card the rule needs changing.
trouble is even if someone attempts to play ball and misses its same result its the intent and the intent was to stop him not get the ball! and its the manner ralls made the tackle thats made it a red , you can go in 2 footed and miss player but its still a red card offence because of the intent, plus of course the refs interpretation of the foul one refs red is anothers yellow same with all decisions
Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:58 pm
Tue Oct 09, 2018 5:08 pm
Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:08 pm
Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:41 pm
montyblue wrote:JIMMY RAT
yes ralls should have elbowed him in the gob he could have claimed that kane was spitting at him when talking, or he could have bent that beak of his when kane called him an uckin anchor or thats what it sounded like.
Tue Oct 09, 2018 10:19 pm
pembroke allan wrote:dogfound wrote:T1JMO wrote:Ralls clearly took him out with no intention of playing the ball - it's a red for me. Kane deserved the yellow too for his reaction. I don't think we will get it overturned either.
if this no intention to play the ball thing means a red card the rule needs changing.
trouble is even if someone attempts to play ball and misses its same result its the intent and the intent was to stop him not get the ball! and its the manner ralls made the tackle thats made it a red , you can go in 2 footed and miss player but its still a red card offence because of the intent, plus of course the refs interpretation of the foul one refs red is anothers yellow same with all decisions
Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:35 am
Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:38 am
dogfound wrote:montyblue wrote:Kane is not the ref its his decision, so his argument falls on its arse he said nothing about running into bang into ralls and try and provoke ralls plain and simple for everybody to see trying to bring attention to the ref i 100% agree with warnocks statement about what kane was trying to do he also said ralls kicked him i thought he put his leg infront of the cry baby like obstruction but the question is what the f..k is kane sticking his rather large nose in for he was not trying to pull 2 players apart he was running over to confront ralls and that's what neil is referring to
he is still at it....kicked him knee high ffs....yeah and salmon live in trees.
Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:39 am
Llan_Blue wrote:pembroke allan wrote:dogfound wrote:T1JMO wrote:Ralls clearly took him out with no intention of playing the ball - it's a red for me. Kane deserved the yellow too for his reaction. I don't think we will get it overturned either.
if this no intention to play the ball thing means a red card the rule needs changing.
trouble is even if someone attempts to play ball and misses its same result its the intent and the intent was to stop him not get the ball! and its the manner ralls made the tackle thats made it a red , you can go in 2 footed and miss player but its still a red card offence because of the intent, plus of course the refs interpretation of the foul one refs red is anothers yellow same with all decisions
This is the strangest looking two footed tackle I’ve ever seen
It’s basically a trip.
Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:15 pm
Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:21 pm
montyblue wrote:Fa reviews are a waste of time for "cardiff" remember derby in the big fall, blizzard conditions , all that bo..cks the penny will drop one day to all the doubters, that cardiff and dare i say welsh, are looked upon by the english fa differently shall we say.