Jump to content
IGNORED

Nige on SSN


Silvio Dante

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, maxjak said:

He maybe a celebrity (!) fan of sorts.  But his quote "It was a terrible tackle, a clear red card tackle"  is IMHO patently bollox?

Mate that particular point has been done to death hasn't it? It was a red. Rule 12 covers it. Key part is:

A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off:

There's then a list, one of which is "serious foul play". That is defined as follows:

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

I am quite satisfied that the Sykes tackle fits the above. It was a fair red card.

I might agree with you that Watson's use of the word "terrible" is an element of hyperbole. But the basic agreement is that it's a fair red.

As to Pearson agreeing, or at least having "no complaints" with the red. That's in his Sky post match interview. First question, at the following link.

https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/12674807/nigel-pearson-i-might-walk-away-due-to-officiating-standards

Edited by ExiledAjax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ExiledAjax said:

Mate that particular point has been done to death hasn't it? It was a red. Rule 12 covers it. Key part is:

A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off:

There's then a list, one of which is "serious foul play". That is defined as follows:

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

I am quite satisfied that the Sykes tackle fits the above. It was a fair red card.

I might agree with you that Watson's use of the word "terrible" is an element of hyperbole. But the basic agreement is that it's a fair red.

As to Pearson agreeing with the red. That's in his Sky post match interview. First question, at the following link.

https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/12674807/nigel-pearson-i-might-walk-away-due-to-officiating-standards

I normally respect your intelligent posts...........but all i can say in this instance is......Whatever?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, maxjak said:

i didn't  realise you were the all seeing all knowing Bhagwan of Ashton Gate?, I will obviously have to make sure i do not challenge your authority again.  It must be great to always be right?

Well that’s a strange reaction. My opinion says it was a horrible tackle and fully deserving of a red card; your opinion is that it wasn’t. 
That doesn’t make me a Bhagwan (whatever that may be). 
It means that I saw it very differently to you. 
However, whatever your view of it is, I disagree with you, not because I’m any sort of authority on the matter but by virtue of the simple fact of using my eyes to see a clearly fired up Sykes was peed off at not getting a free kick and launched himself into a tackle with full rage and intent and was rightly dismissed, and then proceeded to fake a head injury after being pushed in the back. 
You may not like that; but it’s my opinion and yes, I do think I am right. I can’t fathom how anyone can defend Sykes for that last night. 
 

Here’s a thought - watch that incident back and pretend we’re the away team and that Freeman is our player. Now come back and tell me you wouldn’t be furious if their bloke wasn’t sent off. 

Edited by Harry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

However, the comments about chucking the towel in at BCFC as a result is unsettling and does nothing to help those of us who have question marks about Nige's position at our club. Every time I start seeing NP through @Davefevsglasses, the bloody lenses fall out.

 

Or putting the lenses back in (?)….as shit as the overall game is and he’d love to pack it in, focus on his health, family and walking holidays….he’s here to do an unselfish job, likes a challenge and will try to make a difference whilst he’s still in the game. ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maxjak said:

I normally respect your intelligent posts...........but all i can say in this instance is......Whatever?

Are you ok?

You asked for where Pearson has said it was a red and have been given the info, and yet come out with the very childish "whatever"? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Mate that particular point has been done to death hasn't it? It was a red. Rule 12 covers it. Key part is:

A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off:

There's then a list, one of which is "serious foul play". That is defined as follows:

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

I am quite satisfied that the Sykes tackle fits the above. It was a fair red card.

As to Pearson agreeing, or at least having "no complaints" with the red. That's in his Sky post match interview. First question, at the following link.

This is the bit that bugs me most about the cut of the sky YouTube - it makes it look like he's complaining about the decision he isn't actually complaining about (also the one that the majority of replies on here seem to agree was at least reasonable) and deflecting away from the ones that he and we are - some of which we have a letter of apology for. (If I wanted reporting like that I'd watch the political news)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Harry said:

Well that’s a strange reaction. My opinion says it was a horrible tackle and fully deserving of a red card;l, your opinion is that it wasn’t. 
That doesn’t make me a Bhagwan (whatever that may be). 
It means that I saw it very differently to you. 
However, whatever your view of it is, I disagree with you, not because I’m any sort of authority on the matter but by virtue of the simple fact of using my eyes to see a clearly fired up Sykes was peed off at not getting a free kick and launched himself into a tackle with full rage and intent and was rightly dismissed, and then proceeded to fake a head injury after being pushed in the back. 
You may not like that; but it’s my opinion and yes, I do think I am right. I can’t fathom how anyone can defend Sykes for that last night. 
 

Here’s a thought - watch that incident back and pretend we’re the away team and that Freeman is our player. Now come back and tell me you wouldn’t be furious if their bloke wasn’t sent off. 

My God....you do go on?   PS  If you are ever lacking a definition, may i recommend Google?  PS  To save you the trouble, Bhagwan is a Hindu term meaning all knowing Lord   PPS.  I can safely say with my hand on my heart, that No i would not be furious, as that would be an over reaction.......rather similar to the referee's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TheReds said:

Are you ok?

You asked for where Pearson has said it was a red and have been given the info, and yet come out with the very childish "whatever"? 

Who rattled your cage....and invited you to the party?  if Exiled Ajax is polite enough to reply to my post in a reasonable manner.........what the pheck  has it got to do with you?  Go and have your own petty tiff somewhere else.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, 2015 said:

If you ever watch European football you realise how BAD our officials are from the top to bottom. Most of them just don't even understand the game

They do understand the game, I can guarantee you that. They know a damn sight more about the game than the people who watch the game from the stands.

Its fine for everyone to slag of referees, but anyone can take a referees course and show us all how easy it is, perhaps we have a few on this thread who would like to show us!.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Who rattled your cage....and invited you to the party?  if Exiled Ajax is polite enough to reply to my post in a reasonable manner.........what the pheck  has it got to do with you?  Go and have your own petty tiff somewhere else.

Oooohhhh... someone has been on the juice today.... 

Maybe you should actually read back your own posts, they are ridiculous, and not needed. Obviously you simply cannot handle anyone having a different opinion to yourself. 

No doubt it was a drinking alone day....

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, maxjak said:

My God....you do go on?   PS  If you are ever lacking a definition, may i recommend Google?  PS  To save you the trouble, Bhagwan is a Hindu term meaning all knowing Lord   PPS.  I can safely say with my hand on my heart, that No i would not be furious, as that would be an over reaction.......rather similar to the referee's

Thanks for enlightening me. 
I was thinking it was gonna be related to the Rastafarian term for What’s Going On but you’ve ‘learned’ me ?

 

By the way, Hindu, Rasta or Martian, I’m still right and you’re wrong. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

Let people on TalkSport or in the pub say what they want. We know what we’ve seen. I’m wholeheartedly with Pearson on this.

I'm not about threatening to quit the game. That's complete nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Super said:

I'm not about threatening to quit the game. That's complete nonsense.

Think he’s just making the point that it’s important, don’t think he’s got his resignation email ready in his drafts folder, for the next time there’s a dubious throw in given against us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AshtonRobin21 said:

If anyone saw the O'nien (Sunderland) challenge tonight, you'll fully agree with Nige's statements about the standard of refereeing. 

Shambolic. 

He’s a dirty bastard, haven’t seen tonight’s challenge, but he is one who goes over the top of the ball.

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Maltshoveller said:

Garth Crooks!!!!

Imo the worst pundit ever to be on TV

That was until Lianne Sanderson managed to tick all PC boxes and get herself on the box 

I get so angry looking at his team of the week every Monday. He just picks 10 players that scored, and shoehorns them into the most ridiculous XI imaginable. If a centre-half scores, then proceeds to do nothing in defense for 90 minutes, he's in. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Maltshoveller said:

Garth Crooks!!!!

Imo the worst pundit ever to be on TV

 

Every week at BBC Sport Online, usually after extensive badgering, Crooks would submit a feature called "Garth Crooks' Team of the Week": the 11 best-performing players in the Prem.  It was not infrequent for these teams to feature players who had not played that week, were injured, or in one case - had left the club and country. You'd put in your own choices in those cases, to save GC embarrassment.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BCFCGav said:

I get so angry looking at his team of the week every Monday. He just picks 10 players that scored, and shoehorns them into the most ridiculous XI imaginable. If a centre-half scores, then proceeds to do nothing in defense for 90 minutes, he's in. 

 

7 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Every week at BBC Sport Online, usually after extensive badgering, Crooks would submit a feature called "Garth Crooks' Team of the Week": the 11 best-performing players in the Prem.  It was not infrequent for these teams to feature players who had not played that week, were injured, or in one case - had left the club and country. You'd put in your own choices in those cases, to save GC embarrassment.

There was usually a comment about Paul Pogba's hair in there somewhere too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...