[Archived] Rovers 1-1Tottenham

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

The professional foul rule has always been a little bit of a minefield.

For me - if a player makes an honest attempt - it should be a penalty and possibly a yellow card (at most). I would even introduce penalties for so called professional fouls outside the area.

The professional foul rules were brought in for cycnically fouling a player, when running through on goal - hardly what happened on Sunday

[Eddie]

I still say there is a difference between tripping somebody up with the intent to trip them up, and them falling over your foot. And it was also very debatable that he would have got a clean volley off before Ooijer (I think) or Brad got to him

I agree, which is why I think it should have just been a penalty, not a red card, but it was certainly a penalty.

[USABlue]

I'd have sent the Spuds player off

When I saw the ref going for his pocket after talking with the linesman I thought he was going to do exactly that. Well my thoughts were he was going to yellow card him for a dive. Looked at it time and again I still don't see any real contact. I had already mention, definate stitch up by the FA on the appeal, trying to make some form of point. We'll see in the coming weekends just how many get away with worse. Especially if they are, Arsenal, cChelsea, Man U, L'pool. Or of course anyone playing us.

[LeChuck]

Le Chuck to me is just one of them and belongs on that panel

Is it really so difficult for you to understand the rules of the game? Really, is it?

I don't like the rules either, cards are given out too freely and the game is moving closer to a none-contact game. However, that doesn't mean they don't apply, or that the FA are 'out to get us' when the rules are applied to us. There was sufficient contact from Tugay on Ghaly to bring him down (I suggest you watch the replay again if possible, this part is unquestionable when you watch properly i.e. without blue and white specs). There was a very good chance Ghaly would have gone on to have a free shot at goal from inside the box, therefore Tugay was sent off. All this talk about intent etc. is meaningless in this situation as it is not mentioned in the rules.

The job of the panel is to apply to law directly to the situation. Unfortunately for us, they did that. I think the fact that they didn't overturn Ghaly's either shows it isn't some FA plot against us.

I'm certain there was a hidden agenda behind Gavin Peacock's comments of Match of the Day. Either he had been told by the editorial team at MotD (under pressure from the FA) to back the referee or Peacock had been told directly by Lancaster Gate officials.

It's no wonder people can't judge the situation without bias if that's an example of the menaltiy on the situation. Admittedly, I know to take what jim says with a pinch of salt, but still...

[philipl]

Sky called it as they saw it- bad decisions by Dowd.

BBC called it after the editorial panel had been at work- good decisions by Dowd.

[CAPT KAYOS]

Is it really so difficult for you to understand the rules of the game? Really, is it?

No, but I think it is for many naive people who think that was contact to warrant a penalty ( if it had been outside of the area this would not have been called as a foul) - inc the people who are supposed to apply the rules and regulate them.

All part and parcel of what is wrong with the game - if you think there was contact to warrant a penalty never mind a foul then go and be a ref - think you'll find that most people are disagreeing with your interpretation, and not just Rovers fans.

I'll say it again seeing as you missed reading before - if that was a penalty then every challenge in the penalty box should be called as a penalty.

So who is finding it difficult now??

Edited November 24, 2006 by CAPT KAYOS