Search results

A low percentage of goals have an infraction with a chance of getting the goal (given by the ref) disallowed. And maybe only give each team one challenge, so they don't waste it. It's better than having the other team celebrate a goal that shouldn't have been given. Yes that's more tricky. There...

With cricket, as you say, the umpire can check for run outs. There would have to be a strict limit on things a football ref could check for. Team captains and managers could also check other things, but they'd use up a limit of challenges.

No. The ref was right to send him off, although the ref might have thought he kicked Lansbury in the head, when he 'only' kicked him in the chest.

:lol: I can picture a defence lawyer clutching at straws while their client faces assault charges - "He was just caught in between some people and tried to untangle his fists". If you're legs are tangled, you roll away and your legs, miraculously, come with you. You don't kick. What's more...

My spelling is correct, I checked with John Challis.

Should be the NSC tag line. But with the correct spelling.

But your player was guilty of encroachment, right? So the goal was correctly ruled out.

Newcastle should have been given a penalty - they weren't. Happened here many times.