| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays 15:13 - Dec 7 with 36264 views | Plazex |
Actually looks as if Sakho took fabianski down. Hope we have the card rescinded. And bloody hell 3-1 crap. |  |
| |  |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:24 - Dec 7 with 1971 views | skippyjack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:22 - Dec 7 by Darran |
Honestly you never change.  |
His only out is Ashley Williams push. |  |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:27 - Dec 7 with 1949 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:24 - Dec 7 by skippyjack |
His only out is Ashley Williams push. |
no - as I said in my first post, that may have been a yellow card incident (the push).
Even if it was red (deemed by the referee in some other witless nonsense) then it is mistaken identity and Ash couldn't have it applied retrospectively (as was seen for that mistaken identity case with Arsenal last year). | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:28 - Dec 7 with 1944 views | C_jack |
What came first? The handball or the 'clear goal scoring' opportunity?
[Post edited 7 Dec 2014 18:30]
|  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:35 - Dec 7 with 1912 views | Catullus |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 16:26 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
Absolutely not, far more reasonable than "if you don't agree then you have an anti swansea agenda". Im offering you the chance for personal financial gain from your opinion you think is so obviously correct, you are just offering misplaced personal barbs.
How many more times can it be explained that the handball is irrelevant, it is not a reviewable decision. |
Interesting that you call the handball irrelevant. Without it might not Fabianski have got the ball?
And if it denied a clear scoring chance, how did Sakho manage a shot at goal?
We'll see if there's an appeal but, Parlay, I disagree with you.
They don't just look at a second in the match, they review the passage of play.
After all, if I get shoved in the back and fly headfirst into an opponent bringing him down, and the ref sends me off, by your version it would stand. But common sense would say othetwise | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:39 - Dec 7 with 1884 views | BLAZE |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:28 - Dec 7 by C_jack |
What came first? The handball or the 'clear goal scoring' opportunity?
[Post edited 7 Dec 2014 18:30]
|
For me, the hand ball. He looks to have over run the ball and without his arm being in the way and controlling it, Ash is favourite for it imo |  | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:39 - Dec 7 with 1883 views | ItchySphincter |
ooooookay, so now I'm swaying to an appeal being upheld.
But no, I don't think we will or I don't think we'll win. The panel will see it as a foul by the goalie. |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:42 - Dec 7 with 1870 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:35 - Dec 7 by Catullus |
Interesting that you call the handball irrelevant. Without it might not Fabianski have got the ball?
And if it denied a clear scoring chance, how did Sakho manage a shot at goal?
We'll see if there's an appeal but, Parlay, I disagree with you.
They don't just look at a second in the match, they review the passage of play.
After all, if I get shoved in the back and fly headfirst into an opponent bringing him down, and the ref sends me off, by your version it would stand. But common sense would say othetwise |
Of course it is irrelevant as it cannot be disputed after the fact.
I dont understand what is so hard for people to grasp. |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:43 - Dec 7 with 1856 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:24 - Dec 7 by somersetsimon |
I don't see it as a "keeper-less" goal. Even if Fab hadn't touched him, by the time the ball was under control, he would have been pretty wide and it was never going to be that easy. |
It doesnt have to be easy, it just has to be a clear goalscoring opportunity.
A keeper leass goal with the ball at your feet on the corner of the box is exactly that. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:44 - Dec 7 with 1846 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:22 - Dec 7 by Darran |
Honestly you never change. |
Thank God for that, i spoke sense and pulled people up on their bullshit before and still will - that will not change dazza i can assure you. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:45 - Dec 7 with 1844 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:19 - Dec 7 by londonlisa2001 |
what - you're now offering to bet Halsey as well are you?? |
Anybody that is 100% confident in their opinion Lisa.
Still no commitment of an apology I see.
Funny that. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:48 - Dec 7 with 1826 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:45 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
Anybody that is 100% confident in their opinion Lisa.
Still no commitment of an apology I see.
Funny that. |
what exactly are you asking me to apologise for?
the suggestion that someone desperately ignoring all opinions contrary to their own (including a professional referee) in order to maintain the crap that it was a 'fantastic refereeing decision' is a crap supporter?
No - I don't think I will apologise for that actually.
In my opinion, you are a crap supporter - that clear enough for you? | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:49 - Dec 7 with 1823 views | Daithejack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:39 - Dec 7 by ItchySphincter |
ooooookay, so now I'm swaying to an appeal being upheld.
But no, I don't think we will or I don't think we'll win. The panel will see it as a foul by the goalie. |
Well Gary's just said in his post match interview that hes seen the replays and because of the handball and the players getting back he thinks its not a red card and we are going to appeal. |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:51 - Dec 7 with 1812 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:16 - Dec 7 by londonlisa2001 |
oh right. So in your attempt to justify a bad decision you are now disagreeing with a biased Sky team, and a Prem League referee?
And you think I'm the one that is wrong for saying that it's pathetic that so called Swans fans are trying to justify it?
I'll tell you something for nothing, in all my years as a Swans fan, I have been perfectly happy to admit when we play badly, perfectly happy to admit when we have been outplayed, perfectly happy to take a loss without looking for scapegoats, perfectly happy to acknowledge that there are teams that are simply better than us. Never once have I been hoping against hope that a decision goes against us in order to justify my view of an incident. And that's what makes you less of a fan. |
I didn't see the analysis in order to disagree.
Funny that those same pundits said we were outplayed and yet on the other thread disagreeing and lets not forget disagreeing with a CURRENT premier league referee, just for balance.
So would you be willing to apologise to this less of a fan for being abusing me for having the correct decision... Being the better fan it should be oar for the course right? How do you know what im "hoping against hope" for? Your opinion holds no weight im afraid, you are basically saying anyone who disagrees isnt a fan. Dont you think that may be a little childish there our Lisa?
Id say accusing all swansea fans who hold the correct opinion of having an agenda and wishing us to fail frivolous appeals as making you less of a fan. Id say not willing to apologise AFTER it being resolved if the occasion calls for makes you less of a fan (and a person)...
So, you happy to commit?
No?
Didnt think so. Wibble. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:51 - Dec 7 with 1809 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:49 - Dec 7 by Daithejack |
Well Gary's just said in his post match interview that hes seen the replays and because of the handball and the players getting back he thinks its not a red card and we are going to appeal. |
The hand ball is irrelevant. How many more times. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:54 - Dec 7 with 1796 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:48 - Dec 7 by londonlisa2001 |
what exactly are you asking me to apologise for?
the suggestion that someone desperately ignoring all opinions contrary to their own (including a professional referee) in order to maintain the crap that it was a 'fantastic refereeing decision' is a crap supporter?
No - I don't think I will apologise for that actually.
In my opinion, you are a crap supporter - that clear enough for you? |
What a nonsense opinion. You said firstly that anyone who thinks it should have been a red has an agenda. Right?
So if we appeal and the professional panel decide that in fact it was a correct decision then it would suggest your accusation is misplaced.
So on that basis it would seem prevalent for you to apologise right?
Otherwise going around saying fans are crap, and not as good as you for simply holding the correct opinion would probably assume that in fact your insults would be better suited to you. No?
Making such ridiculous trolling statements to people who disagree with you (that you have never met and dont know from Adam) is also pretty stupid. Dont you think?
Come on now good girl, lets have some sense please. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 18:55]
| |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:54 - Dec 7 with 1795 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:51 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
The hand ball is irrelevant. How many more times. |
only to those with an agenda !
Halsey actually stated the game and the incident which provided the precedent, or is he wrong as well?
Are you going to apologise? Because the first thing you said is that we definitely wouldn't appeal. | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:58 - Dec 7 with 1774 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:54 - Dec 7 by londonlisa2001 |
only to those with an agenda !
Halsey actually stated the game and the incident which provided the precedent, or is he wrong as well?
Are you going to apologise? Because the first thing you said is that we definitely wouldn't appeal. |
Which agenda Lisa?
The agenda of understanding the rules of reviews? maybe caps will work:-
YOU CANNOT REVIEW A NOT GIVEN HAND-BALL. WHEN TALKING ABOUT A REVIEW, DUE TO THE FACT IT CANNOT BE REVIEWED - IT BECOMES IRRELEVANT.
so again, which agenda is it when its simply understanding the rules?
I didnt say we were definitely not going to appeal, i said we would be stupid to, didnt think we would and made it clear if we did we would not win.
But as the better person, of course I will apologise for being incorrect. Luckily for me i have not been personal, questioned you as a fan or your motives. Will you? No?
Again, funny that. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 18:59]
| |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:59 - Dec 7 with 1771 views | C_jack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:51 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
The hand ball is irrelevant. How many more times. |
It's irrelevant to you because it shows you are wrong.
Look at where the ball bounces, the mechanics of his body suggest the only way he can knock the ball past Fabianski, is with his arm, that is a foul.
Any other part of his body and the path of the ball changes as such, that Fabianski is likely to smother it or get something on it.
The handball is everything in that passage of play, apart from to the select blinkered few, of course. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:00 - Dec 7 with 1760 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:54 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
What a nonsense opinion. You said firstly that anyone who thinks it should have been a red has an agenda. Right?
So if we appeal and the professional panel decide that in fact it was a correct decision then it would suggest your accusation is misplaced.
So on that basis it would seem prevalent for you to apologise right?
Otherwise going around saying fans are crap, and not as good as you for simply holding the correct opinion would probably assume that in fact your insults would be better suited to you. No?
Making such ridiculous trolling statements to people who disagree with you (that you have never met and dont know from Adam) is also pretty stupid. Dont you think?
Come on now good girl, lets have some sense please. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 18:55]
|
well so far, the prevalent opinion on this from all others (the ones who are not Swans fans) is that your analysis of what can and can't be done or looked at is actually incorrect.
And, no - us failing on appeal would not suggest that my opinion that you desperately wanting the Swans to not appeal or to lose is not a sign that my accusation is misplaced at all.
And stop with the good girl bit you patronising tosser. You've obviously lived in Australia too long. We should aspire to being a little less neanderthal here don't you think little boy? | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:01 - Dec 7 with 1747 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 18:59 - Dec 7 by C_jack |
It's irrelevant to you because it shows you are wrong.
Look at where the ball bounces, the mechanics of his body suggest the only way he can knock the ball past Fabianski, is with his arm, that is a foul.
Any other part of his body and the path of the ball changes as such, that Fabianski is likely to smother it or get something on it.
The handball is everything in that passage of play, apart from to the select blinkered few, of course. |
maybe try caps again... IT DOESNT MATTER!
Makes no difference if he handled it a thousand times on each hand.
It cannot be reviewed.
Cogito ergo sum - its irrelevant now. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:04 - Dec 7 with 1723 views | monmouth |
Well now see, if I had to bet, I would bet that:
a) both Lisa and Parlay are intelligent swans supporters
b) both can internet debate for wales
c) this thread might be going longer than the appeal
Having seen the front on footage, my sympathies are with Lisa on the content of this one now. I also just had a chat with a ref (just a Scottish Premier Lino, admittedly) and his view was that the handball is certainly relevant in this case, and that though he thought the appeal could go either way that he thought 75% in Fab's favour. He certainly thought we should appeal. as no way can it be called frivolous so nothing to lose. I hope he's right.
What do you hope (not think) the outcome of the appeal will be Parlay? |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:06 - Dec 7 with 1715 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:00 - Dec 7 by londonlisa2001 |
well so far, the prevalent opinion on this from all others (the ones who are not Swans fans) is that your analysis of what can and can't be done or looked at is actually incorrect.
And, no - us failing on appeal would not suggest that my opinion that you desperately wanting the Swans to not appeal or to lose is not a sign that my accusation is misplaced at all.
And stop with the good girl bit you patronising tosser. You've obviously lived in Australia too long. We should aspire to being a little less neanderthal here don't you think little boy? |
Nothing to be desperate for lisa. We are entering into discourse based on you (opening) with an opinion and thus stating anyone else must have an agenda. Such an opinion was challenged by me heavily weighted by the laws of the game and your retorts have been:-
"Im a better fan than you"
"You have an agenda" (of which you still have not clarified)
"You are a crap fan"
"You are childish"
"You are a neanderthal " (?) etc etc
To top it all off you fall in a bucket of irony by claiming i am then being patronising for asking you to be a good girl and stop your pointless attacks.
I have offered to apologise if im wrong, you have said if im correct then im a crap fan - work that out.
Maybe you need to match the way i have approached this in a very inoffensive and grown up manner as you have dug yourself so deep you are closer to Australia than I am. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 19:07]
| |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:09 - Dec 7 with 1690 views | NeathJack |
As long as the club get advice that, as it appears from Mark Halsey, the handball will be taken into account in any appeal, then an appeal is nailed on. |  | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:10 - Dec 7 with 1679 views | skippyjack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:04 - Dec 7 by monmouth |
Well now see, if I had to bet, I would bet that:
a) both Lisa and Parlay are intelligent swans supporters
b) both can internet debate for wales
c) this thread might be going longer than the appeal
Having seen the front on footage, my sympathies are with Lisa on the content of this one now. I also just had a chat with a ref (just a Scottish Premier Lino, admittedly) and his view was that the handball is certainly relevant in this case, and that though he thought the appeal could go either way that he thought 75% in Fab's favour. He certainly thought we should appeal. as no way can it be called frivolous so nothing to lose. I hope he's right.
What do you hope (not think) the outcome of the appeal will be Parlay? |
It's clearly in our favour.. if we show the other hand ball incident they've overturned previously.. we've got a legitimate claim.. | |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:11 - Dec 7 with 1676 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 19:04 - Dec 7 by monmouth |
Well now see, if I had to bet, I would bet that:
a) both Lisa and Parlay are intelligent swans supporters
b) both can internet debate for wales
c) this thread might be going longer than the appeal
Having seen the front on footage, my sympathies are with Lisa on the content of this one now. I also just had a chat with a ref (just a Scottish Premier Lino, admittedly) and his view was that the handball is certainly relevant in this case, and that though he thought the appeal could go either way that he thought 75% in Fab's favour. He certainly thought we should appeal. as no way can it be called frivolous so nothing to lose. I hope he's right.
What do you hope (not think) the outcome of the appeal will be Parlay? |
I don't think we will appeal, i think they will be advised tonight and make the decision not to tomorrow.
If we do appeal which i for one really hope we dont, then it goes without saying i hope we win and will be the first to come on here happily eating my humble pie.
Your lino is wrong. The handball will not come into it. It cannot be reviewed as it is a separate foul. Any review will be based on the events after the handball which is the foul on Sakho and whether the foul warranted a red. Of which it certainly did, certainly enough to go with the decision of the ref who made it.
Will the other side who have been far more offensive and insulting do the same? [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 19:13]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
