Redandproud Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 Both Bournemouth goals should have been disallowed, 1st goal ,Jack Hunt down ,head injury, referee should have stopped the game, 2nd goal,elbow on Seesengnon ,should have been disallowed for a elbow and Bournemouth player sent off,am I right, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grifty Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redandproud Posted March 4, 2021 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 6 minutes ago, grifty said: No No ,WHY, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazred Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 Where/when did the elbow on Sessegnon happen? I must of missed that. Not seen the highlights but i didn't think he was in the box defending the corner for their winner. Was it something off the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grifty Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 58 minutes ago, Redandproud said: No ,WHY, Regardless if Hunt went down holding his head, Bentley needs to play to the whistle. Watch the replay back, he is too busy waving his hands towards the ref to get him to look at Hunt, moving left from the post so when the ball is swung in, he is out of position and chucks it in the net. If he kept his concentration, he catches that, play stops, we go in at half time 1-0. I dunno why a Bournemouth player should be sent off for an elbow and the goal disallowed when no-one is within 10 yards of him. 1st goal Bentley should have kept his concentration 2nd goal Bakinson should have gone for the ball instead of trying to wrestle with Billing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedEyez Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 1 minute ago, grifty said: Regardless if Hunt went down holding his head, Bentley needs to play to the whistle. Watch the replay back, he is too busy waving his hands towards the ref to get him to look at Hunt, moving left from the post so when the ball is swung in, he is out of position and chucks it in the net. If he kept his concentration, he catches that, play stops, we go in at half time 1-1. I dunno why a Bournemouth player should be sent off for an elbow and the goal disallowed when no-one is within 10 yards of him. 1st goal Bentley should have kept his concentration 2nd goal Bakinson should have gone for the ball instead of trying to wrestle with Billing. 1-0 up I reckon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxy27 Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 Both Bournemouth goals should have been ... Prevented by City. Didn't deserve to lose I didn't think but have to take it on the chin. Positive performance definitely in comparison to what we've watched over the last 10 weeks or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 11 minutes ago, grifty said: Regardless if Hunt went down holding his head, Bentley needs to play to the whistle No doubt, however it is correct that play should have been stopped for Hunt's head injury, the ref has looked at the box before the shot has been taken as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redandproud Posted March 4, 2021 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 4 minutes ago, Lrrr said: No doubt, however it is correct that play should have been stopped for Hunt's head injury, the ref has looked at the box before the shot has been taken as well The rule states play is stopped if player goes down with head injury, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderwithtommy Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 I am totally at a loss as to how the ref didn’t stop the play for their first goal, it is completely clear in the rules that the game is stopped when a player has a head injury, immediately. the refs first concern should always be player safety, the time it took for hunt to get attention was a huge risk that shouldn’t have been taken. In an instance like this the ref really should have to explain himself, specifically with the amount of attention and evidence about head injuries in sport and long term consequences. I am also convinced, if that happened to one of their “named” players, like Solanke, he wouldn’t have been able to get his whistle to his mouth quickly enough. I hope the moderators at the FA ask him to explain the decision, not a leg to stand on. end of rant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 You've got to play to the whistle. Didn't LJ tell the team that...and we wouldn't be stopping for head injuries unless the ref blows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted March 4, 2021 Report Share Posted March 4, 2021 2 minutes ago, spudski said: You've got to play to the whistle. Didn't LJ tell the team that...and we wouldn't be stopping for head injuries unless the ref blows? I think it was just injuries in general, normal injuries are at referees discretion hence why LJ said it, head injuries are supposed to be an immediate stop to the game. I don't think anyones saying the lads shouldn't have been playing until a whistle more that the ref was poor in his practice for not stopping the game when he's seen a player on the floor (can see in the highlights) clutching his head particularly as you know roughly where the balls about to be delivered to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.