real_bristol Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 The way I look at it is reverse the situation. Same two players, same place, same incident. But Cunningham raises his hand and Tomlin went down holding his face, then jumps up and goes off the field and then comes straight back on. How would the Atyeo and Dolman have reacted to Tomlin? There is your answer. I might be getting confused here but Cunningham didn't jump up he had treatment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedorDead BCFC Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 I don't care, whether he feigned injury or not. They were on a mission to injure our players at their place and you could see that they were intent on it again yesterday. Cunningham probably gave him some verbal over the challenge that took him out at their place to incite Tomlin to react. As for Heaton being sent off, if they adapted that rule all the time on keepers then how many teams will be playing with their sub keeper or without a keeper every Saturday. If a keeper dives the player is too fast it often results in a foul, but no intent just attempting to get the ball, but the last defender usually take the attacker out with intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kaiser Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Ok jumped up is probably a bit much. He walked off, directly towards me and then raced straight back on. You don't think had it been Tomlin doing this, there'd have been some serious abuse?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted December 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Ok jumped up is probably a bit much. He walked off, directly towards me and then raced straight back on. You don't think had it been Tomlin doing this, there'd have been some serious abuse?? Exactly. I think GC is getting an easy ride from most City fans myself. That doesn't mean I don't thin it was a red - it was - but we can seperate our judgement of GC's reaction from the fact it was a red card offence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy1968 Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Tomlin actually appears to glance around to check he's not in the ref's eyeline before swinging his elbow. Silly boy forgot the lino had a clear view though. Footballers aren't the brightest, are they? Regardless of the pain level inflicted it was clearly intended to take an opposing player out and was quite correctly adjudged to be violent conduct. A straight red offence.Quite. I thought Cunningham hitting the deck just meant that the referee could not chose to ignore the incident. (I don't think he was going to though.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrizzleRed Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 The way that Greg Cunningham reacted to the shove he received from Tomlin was pretty pathetic but resulted in a man being sent off which left us at a distinct advantage. He rolled around the floor, exaggerated contact and forced the referee to make a decision. The question I would pose is: A) Was Cunningham right to dive and feign injury to get the man sent off for what was a red card offence B) Was this simply cheating and symptomatic of the modern game? C) Does anyone actually think it hurt him? I think my opinion is a mixture of A and B. Would be interested to get the thoughts of the forum on what was a key event in the match. I accept everyone is entitled to their opinions and that's what this forum is for, but why are you so indignant about this, when we have been the victims of outright cheating on countless occasions? I think everyone seems to agree this was clearly a red card incident. Considering the damage inflicted on GC at the last meeting of the two clubs, I don't blame him if he did actually make a bit more of it than there was, though it's far from clear that he actually did, as there was clearly a strong contact from where I was viewing. I would have had an issue if GC had faked contact, as in my book, that IS cheating. The point that irritates me is all the hand wringing about this incident, while we're deep in the $h1t and need to be concentrating on getting out of it. Why criticise our own player who was clearly intentionally struck in the face by an opposition player of a club who certainly aren't afraid to cause serious injury to opposition players, as Greg Cunningham has first hand knowledge of! Given a choice between players who go out with the intention to cause serious injury to opposition players, to someone who is 'alleged' to have made more of an incident, I know which one I find more offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderArmyy Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 vile club, vile manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OfficiallyRed+ Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 I accept everyone is entitled to their opinions and that's what this forum is for, but why are you so indignant about this, when we have been the victims of outright cheating on countless occasions? I think everyone seems to agree this was clearly a red card incident. Considering the damage inflicted on GC at the last meeting of the two clubs, I don't blame him if he did actually make a bit more of it than there was, though it's far from clear that he actually did, as there was clearly a strong contact from where I was viewing. I would have had an issue if GC had faked contact, as in my book, that IS cheating. The point that irritates me is all the hand wringing about this incident, while we're deep in the $h1t and need to be concentrating on getting out of it. Why criticise our own player who was clearly intentionally struck in the face by an opposition player of a club who certainly aren't afraid to cause serious injury to opposition players, as Greg Cunningham has first hand knowledge of! Given a choice between players who go out with the intention to cause serious injury to opposition players, to someone who is 'alleged' to have made more of an incident, I know which one I find more offensive. Could you emagine this forum if we had El Hadj Diouf or Joey Barton playing for us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted December 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 I accept everyone is entitled to their opinions and that's what this forum is for, but why are you so indignant about this, when we have been the victims of outright cheating on countless occasions? I think everyone seems to agree this was clearly a red card incident. Considering the damage inflicted on GC at the last meeting of the two clubs, I don't blame him if he did actually make a bit more of it than there was, though it's far from clear that he actually did, as there was clearly a strong contact from where I was viewing. I would have had an issue if GC had faked contact, as in my book, that IS cheating. The point that irritates me is all the hand wringing about this incident, while we're deep in the $h1t and need to be concentrating on getting out of it. Why criticise our own player who was clearly intentionally struck in the face by an opposition player of a club who certainly aren't afraid to cause serious injury to opposition players, as Greg Cunningham has first hand knowledge of! Given a choice between players who go out with the intention to cause serious injury to opposition players, to someone who is 'alleged' to have made more of an incident, I know which one I find more offensive. Re-read my post and subsequent replies and not at any point have I queried that it is a red card. It clearly was. I just don't think that warrants the response that GC gave to the incident. Whether a play wears red, white, pink or blue I personally don't appreciate that level of gamesmanship. Just my two pennies worth and the diversity of replies shows that there are a number of different views being exchanged, which illustrates the complexity of the issue. I understand that GC reacted like any professional player would but that doesn't mean it is the right thing to do IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrizzleRed Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Yeah I reckon they'd be writing personal apologies to every club/player they felt had been sinned against! At least they'd Re-read my post and subsequent replies and not at any point have I queried that it is a red card. It clearly was. I just don't think that warrants the response that GC gave to the incident. Whether a play wears red, white, pink or blue I personally don't appreciate that level of gamesmanship. Just my two pennies worth and the diversity of replies shows that there are a number of different views being exchanged, which illustrates the complexity of the issue. I understand that GC reacted like any professional player would but that doesn't mean it is the right thing to do IMHO. I don't need to re-read your post because I'm not aware that I ever insinuated you were querying the red card. What I'm saying is Cunningham was clearly struck in the face, so why are you making a big deal about it? I could see your point more if it was against a team who conducted themselves in a gentlemanly, honest and professional way, but that doesn't apply to Peterbro, does it?!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted December 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Yeah I reckon they'd be writing personal apologies to every club/player they felt had been sinned against! At least they'd I don't need to re-read your post because I'm not aware that I ever insinuated you were querying the red card. What I'm saying is Cunningham was clearly struck in the face, so why are you making a big deal about it? I could see your point more if it was against a team who conducted themselves in a gentlemanly, honest and professional way, but that doesn't apply to Peterbro, does it?!!! Why is the opposition relevant? Surely how you react to that is as right or as wrong no matter who you are playing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrizzleRed Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Why is the opposition relevant? Surely how you react to that is as right or as wrong no matter who you are playing? Have to disagree there, you fight fire with fire in my book, otherwise you lose out big time. I think our team is far too sporting for it's own good in many ways. This may be good to the purists, but really doesn't do us any favours on the field in a dog eat dog sport. The bottom line for me is this was a very minor incident and it really surprises me that you have found it that much of a problem. I've been sickened at times by some of the cynical cheats I've seen in football and this particular incident really doesn't deserve comment in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted December 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Have to disagree there, you fight fire with fire in my book, otherwise you lose out big time. I think our team is far too sporting for it's own good in many ways. This may be good to the purists, but really doesn't do us any favours on the field in a dog eat dog sport. The bottom line for me is this was a very minor incident and it really surprises me that you have found it that much of a problem. I've been sickened at times by some of the cynical cheats I've seen in football and this particular incident really doesn't deserve comment in comparison. I am inclined to agree with your general point, that we are in a dog fight and need to show a level of commitment to the cause. The main reason I have been so involved in this thread is almost certainly due to the fact that I am supposed to be working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i hate you butler Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Just ask yourself this, would Tomlin of done the same thing had he of been elbowed in the face? i think so!!Fair play to greg, thoes thugs kept him out for months, i think its called justice!! Oh and 3 points....... :DWe need to get nasty if we want to stay up, if that means we are classed as 'cheats' then i really couldn't give a dam!! COYRRR!!THATS THE SPIRITBEST POST FOR YONKS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 I would suggest the blame lie with the bloke who elbowed him. yep! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 As would I, and it was a clear red, but did the way Cunningham react really reflect injury incurred from the contact? Most footballers would do the same. He was elbowed after all and the player deserved a red, so kinda does deserve a reaction to push for a red card (if that makes sense?!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garland-sweden Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Saw it on player. Red card Imo even if Cunningham not fall to the ground. Think it was the intstic in Cunningham that he went down or maybe the hurt was strong, I dont know. The lineman saw it clear, correct dessicion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC96 Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 The way that Greg Cunningham reacted to the shove he received from Tomlin was pretty pathetic but resulted in a man being sent off which left us at a distinct advantage. He rolled around the floor, exaggerated contact and forced the referee to make a decision. The question I would pose is: A) Was Cunningham right to dive and feign injury to get the man sent off for what was a red card offence B) Was this simply cheating and symptomatic of the modern game? C) Does anyone actually think it hurt him? I think my opinion is a mixture of A and B. Would be interested to get the thoughts of the forum on what was a key event in the match. contact allows him to go down it was fair, he felt contact and did the right thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You Do The Dziekanowski Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 getting elbowed in the face wouldnt tickle I can tell you that. It depends where it him Jaw not that bad, ar I und the eye socket that hurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 he wasn't elbowed, he was hit in the face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arpaul Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 Not at all. Tomlin is just a fat toad with an attitude problem. saw it plain as day swung his arm at cunningham violently,dirty little **** deserved to get sent off, Maybe not Mr Popular today, but, on the few occasions I've seen him play, he looks half tidy. Always seems to get forward to support his strikers, scores his share from midfield, and has what I will describe as a "Competitive" streak in him. Before kick off I felt both Tomlin and Boyd could cause us problems. The formers sending off obviously stifled Boyds contribution in the game. Who knows what the score would've been had it been eleven a side..... Would it be wrong to suggest that Tomlin is the sort of midfielder we've lacked for the last few seasons?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsquirrel Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 my take is if cunningham had just got on with it , it would have probably happened again,maybe even harder. id have done the same as him,no need to take that from anybody,get them off given the first chance. every other tom dick and harry at every other club does the same. might not be 100% gamesmanship but we put ourselves at a disadvantage not playing the same rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 contact allows him to go down it was fair, he felt contact and did the right thing. :laugh: I always think this is a joke. Give me the days where British players would not go down. They had more pride than to show someone they were hurt. Right to go down my arse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevedoncity Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 GC going to ground not only attracted the attention of the reffee and the linesman but also made sure that both he didn't react in a manor that would get him into trouble, also that the reffee had reacted before the rest of the team started a fight with the rest of the Peterborough players. GC had every right to go down under the contact made and ensured the red card and no conflict between the other players that would have resulted in other cards being issued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheddarReds Posted December 30, 2012 Report Share Posted December 30, 2012 There is a lot of justling in the modern game, if he hadn't gone down I'm not sure whether it would be given as a red card.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted December 31, 2012 Report Share Posted December 31, 2012 I don't know how much contact there was. It looked as though he was caught flush in the face from my seat in the Dolman. If you get caught on the bridge of the nose , it can be pretty painful. Only GC knows how much force he felt , maybe he's a bit of a pussy , or maybe he is showing some of the street wise tactics that other teams employ against us and our players are accused of not doing enough. I was the East End so had to watch the FLS highlights and it looked like pretty good elbow contact to me. I actually think he was dazed by it as he didn't look his normal self immediately after the incident. He made two poor passes amd then dithered on the ball to help give away the penalty. I said to people around me I wasn't sure he was OK and it did look like there was some activityand signalling to him from the bench after the pen was scored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exAtyeoMax Posted December 31, 2012 Report Share Posted December 31, 2012 I was the East End so had to watch the FLS highlights and it looked like pretty good elbow contact to me. I actually think he was dazed by it as he didn't look his normal self immediately after the incident. He made two poor passes amd then dithered on the ball to help give away the penalty. I said to people around me I wasn't sure he was OK and it did look like there was some activityand signalling to him from the bench after the pen was scored. It wasn't an elbow - he was struck straight in the face by Tomlin's hand, not a punch but with the flat of his hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin 101 Posted December 31, 2012 Report Share Posted December 31, 2012 If my leg had nearly been broken by the same team then I wouldn't have a problem exaggerating to get my revenge. However I don't think it mattered what his reaction was as the linesman saw the incident clearly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.