| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays 15:13 - Dec 7 with 35717 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 Hope we have the card rescinded.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 20:09 - Dec 7 with 1446 views | skippyjack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:03 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
No, the goalscoring opportunity was denied as soon as he impeded him.
His goalscoring opportunity became less of an opportunity DUE to the foul which is why it can be brought back and the red given.
He had a secondary opportunity which is there purely to keep the game at 11v11. There was in fact an exact parallel with Caulkers (i think) sending off for cardiff last year. He committed a professional foul, the ref played advantage and the striker missed, it was brought back and e red was given.
Correct then and was widely praised, by myself also. Same applies here. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 20:06]
|
A ref would normally give a yellow in that situation.. because I've seen it happen in other games.. the yellow is the correct call.. it's a debate I've read up about.. |  |
| 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 20:09 - Dec 7 with 1440 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:06 - Dec 7 by perchrockjack |
Parlay.
That's some response.
Didn't read it all as I have a short attention sp.
Good posting .
No one poster is better than another |
Thank you.
Dont be silly though, lisa is better than all of us because she thinks it wasnt a red. |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:09 - Dec 7 with 1439 views | Brynmill_Jack |
Pssst Parlay |  |
| Each time I go to Bedd - au........................ |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:10 - Dec 7 with 1427 views | exiledclaseboy |
I see Parlay's got his virtual hamster wheel out again and is keeping you all busy. Like fiddles.  |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:12 - Dec 7 with 1398 views | perchrockjack |
They ve had a hot spring in oz | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:14 - Dec 7 with 1396 views | Brynmill_Jack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:10 - Dec 7 by exiledclaseboy |
I see Parlay's got his virtual hamster wheel out again and is keeping you all busy. Like fiddles. |
Not me mate, wised up after DGT and yours truly got him so upset he made a thread all about us stalking him then talked to himself on it. Pitiful . But it's fair to say that DGT's the boy for him. I'm pleased to say I've had him on ignore ever since. | |
| Each time I go to Bedd - au........................ |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:17 - Dec 7 with 1381 views | waynekerr55 |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:32 - Dec 7 by lidojack |
If common sense prevails they will be considered the same incident though.
If the ref gives the handball there's no red card.
If the striker doesn't handball it he doesn't get it around Fabianski and there's no goal scoring opportunity to deny and therefore no red card. |
Apologies for not trawling the thread, but if we were to literally interpret the rules, then he'd get off. Sakho hit the post, therefore technically a goalscoring opportunity was not denied |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:18 - Dec 7 with 1371 views | Darran |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:17 - Dec 7 by waynekerr55 |
Apologies for not trawling the thread, but if we were to literally interpret the rules, then he'd get off. Sakho hit the post, therefore technically a goalscoring opportunity was not denied |
Spot on Wayne. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:20 - Dec 7 with 1370 views | NeathJack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:17 - Dec 7 by waynekerr55 |
Apologies for not trawling the thread, but if we were to literally interpret the rules, then he'd get off. Sakho hit the post, therefore technically a goalscoring opportunity was not denied |
The ref had already blown at that point so ironically the only person to actually deny Sakho a goalscoring opportunity was Foy. |  | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:20 - Dec 7 with 1362 views | Jackfath |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:20 - Dec 7 by NeathJack |
The ref had already blown at that point so ironically the only person to actually deny Sakho a goalscoring opportunity was Foy. |
In that case he should have sent himself off. |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:25 - Dec 7 with 1345 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:09 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
Thank you.
Dont be silly though, lisa is better than all of us because she thinks it wasnt a red. |
You are either deliberately misconstruing what I have said or you are completely thick. Which is it? | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:29 - Dec 7 with 1328 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:18 - Dec 7 by Darran |
Spot on Wayne. |
He is not spot on, because the goalscoring opportunity was being through on goal with no keeper that was denied by fabianski.
IF...
the ref used his discretion to wait for play to deveop then the resulant chance would be not in Sakhos favour but indeed the offending party. This "chance" is much harder directly caused by the foul which is why the ref can bring it back.
He denied the clear goalscoring opportunity that Sakho would have had if he hadnt have impeded him. Because he was left woth a harder one does not discount the former. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:30 - Dec 7 with 1320 views | Darran |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:29 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
He is not spot on, because the goalscoring opportunity was being through on goal with no keeper that was denied by fabianski.
IF...
the ref used his discretion to wait for play to deveop then the resulant chance would be not in Sakhos favour but indeed the offending party. This "chance" is much harder directly caused by the foul which is why the ref can bring it back.
He denied the clear goalscoring opportunity that Sakho would have had if he hadnt have impeded him. Because he was left woth a harder one does not discount the former. |
He wasn't denied he had a shot and missed. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:30 - Dec 7 with 1316 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:25 - Dec 7 by londonlisa2001 |
You are either deliberately misconstruing what I have said or you are completely thick. Which is it? |
Im probably completely thick Lisa, ive already learned im a rubbish fan, you are better than me, football laws arent correct, i was rooting for Reading in the play offs against... Us and of course that i want Fabianski to be banned.
There is a lot ove learned about myself today. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:31 - Dec 7 with 1312 views | C_jack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:30 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
Im probably completely thick Lisa, ive already learned im a rubbish fan, you are better than me, football laws arent correct, i was rooting for Reading in the play offs against... Us and of course that i want Fabianski to be banned.
There is a lot ove learned about myself today. |
How do you understand the process? |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:32 - Dec 7 with 1305 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:30 - Dec 7 by Darran |
He wasn't denied he had a shot and missed. |
He was denied the shot he should have had. The one he was left with would have saved fabianski had it gone in, it didnt, so he was off (correctly) for denying the opportunity he would have had if the foul had not taken place.
But the ref didnt play advantage anyway so its a moot point. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 20:32]
| |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:33 - Dec 7 with 1298 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:31 - Dec 7 by C_jack |
How do you understand the process? |
How do you? | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:34 - Dec 7 with 1285 views | jackonicko |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:29 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
He is not spot on, because the goalscoring opportunity was being through on goal with no keeper that was denied by fabianski.
IF...
the ref used his discretion to wait for play to deveop then the resulant chance would be not in Sakhos favour but indeed the offending party. This "chance" is much harder directly caused by the foul which is why the ref can bring it back.
He denied the clear goalscoring opportunity that Sakho would have had if he hadnt have impeded him. Because he was left woth a harder one does not discount the former. |
If you insist on being so literal on the rules, Parlay, then the words of Law 12 are very clear. The red card is for denying a clear goal scoring opportunity. There is no distinction between a clearer or better goal scoring opportunity. It's binary.
He had a clear opportunity. He therefore wasn't denied. Therefore, it is more than fair to argue not a red card. |  | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:35 - Dec 7 with 1283 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:30 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
Im probably completely thick Lisa, ive already learned im a rubbish fan, you are better than me, football laws arent correct, i was rooting for Reading in the play offs against... Us and of course that i want Fabianski to be banned.
There is a lot ove learned about myself today. |
That's good Parlay - that self awareness is the start of a journey of improvement. | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:37 - Dec 7 with 1274 views | C_jack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:33 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
How do you? |
marvellous stuff | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:38 - Dec 7 with 1268 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:37 - Dec 7 by C_jack |
marvellous stuff |
Oh, thanks for the contribution. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:38 - Dec 7 with 1263 views | exiledclaseboy |
I haven't read all of this thread by any means but isn't the relevant question whether the ref would have pulled play back and disallowed the goal had Sakho's shot gone in? If the answer is no, then it's clear that no goalscoring opportunity was denied and the red card should be rescinded. If Foy says yes (which he will and Sky's enhanced audio showing him blowing the whistle before Sakho's attempt on goal will support him in that) then there are no grounds for appeal. If we appeal, which I think we will, we'll lose.
The handball is irrelevant. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 20:41]
| |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:39 - Dec 7 with 1250 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:35 - Dec 7 by londonlisa2001 |
That's good Parlay - that self awareness is the start of a journey of improvement. |
Oh cracker. You know that lowest form of wit saying don't you? You will be going down the well trodden mental health route next.
Funny you dont respond to my probing questions yet more than happy to give little playground one liners (remember i am supposed to be the childish and patronising one here) this is a bit like Dawn French calling Lenny Henry fat isnt it? | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:41 - Dec 7 with 1234 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:38 - Dec 7 by exiledclaseboy |
I haven't read all of this thread by any means but isn't the relevant question whether the ref would have pulled play back and disallowed the goal had Sakho's shot gone in? If the answer is no, then it's clear that no goalscoring opportunity was denied and the red card should be rescinded. If Foy says yes (which he will and Sky's enhanced audio showing him blowing the whistle before Sakho's attempt on goal will support him in that) then there are no grounds for appeal. If we appeal, which I think we will, we'll lose.
The handball is irrelevant. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 20:41]
|
You awful fan you. Sense is banned around these here parts, its "save the polish 1" or nothing here.
I still dont think we will appeal regardless of what Monk has said, someone with sense will surely have a word in his shell like come tomorrow. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 20:42]
| |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:43 - Dec 7 with 1221 views | C_jack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 20:38 - Dec 7 by exiledclaseboy |
I haven't read all of this thread by any means but isn't the relevant question whether the ref would have pulled play back and disallowed the goal had Sakho's shot gone in? If the answer is no, then it's clear that no goalscoring opportunity was denied and the red card should be rescinded. If Foy says yes (which he will and Sky's enhanced audio showing him blowing the whistle before Sakho's attempt on goal will support him in that) then there are no grounds for appeal. If we appeal, which I think we will, we'll lose.
The handball is irrelevant. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 20:41]
|
If there's no handball then there's nothing, no goalscoring opportunity, just a big ol heap of Williams, Sakho and Fabianski.
The only part of his body that he can knock it past Fabianski with is his hand. He can't raise his foot that high and he's never putting his head down that low knowing what's coming.
It's the game's equivalent of entrapment, you can't foul to get another player to foul you. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 20:44]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.