Search results

Sorry G&T induced and not checked for typing mistakes but I am sure you can get the jist of it.

Son came up with an idea which I think is quite good. Managers are always in the 4th officials ear so why cant he note the time of any o=incident mentioned and rthe 4 officials whichg those specific incidents after the game and make a decision on whether or not they have missed something...

Not gone to bed as wife is present wrapping and I am on here and watching homes in the sun but still Happy Christmas to all even:::moo:

Austin banned for 3 games ending with cup game in January.

I always thought that it was cow tailng so even at 74 years old you can learn something thank you.

Simply because I believe the FA are cow tailing to the TV companies and the pundits.

How would I know as I was on Surrey FA and the games on TV were not analysed as much as now with slow motion replays. My point is that they have the facility for the ref and his assistants to have a 2nd look and then if needed could include it in his report, which I would have no objection to.

I think that they would have a better idea of the players intentions re violent play and diving.

I would prefer ex players who have been in the situation to refer the matter for further discussion rather than refs who have never been in that situation. Shearer would know better than Dermot Gallagher whether he could have avoided it but I am just using them as examples as Shearer is a TV...

Hence my suggestion of the 3 match officials look at it again after the game. It would only mean delaying their departure by a maximum of 90 minutes ,if that much by putting it on fast forward. My recorder goes at 4X, 10X 60X or 300X the actual speed and at 10X you can see things to go back...

Open to debate but no doubt the panel will come out against him. Perhaps the panel should be ex players who have played the game not refs who 9 times out of 10 are refs because they werent able to play the game very well.

You are misunderstandingf me my views on retrospective action would be confined to the match officials admitting they made a mistake or missed it and then taking action not a panel afterwards. VAR will help to make that happen so Yes I am going to the Palace game irrespective

Influenced by TV as KVLT pointed out on BT score line. Put in another way I would think CH would be annoyed if GM or TH didnt contest such a ball. Whether or not he went to far and could have pulled out is open to interpretation but he had to go for the ball

That is the problem it should be the match officials doing it not TV. Hopefully after the cup game VAR may come into use so these incidents will be picked up immediately and take the power from TV pundits.

So why is a decision not taken until late Saturday evening. I do not think that it was violent conduct but that is just my interpretation and others may think differently, but either way a decision could be made a lot earlier and perhaps by the ref concerned.

I have no problem with the ref deciding AT THE TIME or a panel looking at video straight after the game. If that happened he would have been charged by 6pm What I object to is a TV program that is nothing whatsoever to do with football administration having a say on who should or shouldnt...

We must agree to disagree as I believe it is all part of football..

I am old fashioned and believe that it is one of the refs prime tasks to look out for such incidents in game. If you can help him by bringing in VAR so much to the good. But do not take action based on a TV program 6 hours later that has no standing in football in relation to rules etc...

I explained that in an earlier post when it was raised.

My point which seems to have been missed is that I believe it is wrong to charge a player based on TV seen later at different speeds etc. Had the ref considered it dangerous he would have taken action at the time.