It's not that straightforward - referees will often chicken out of big decisions given half a chance. If Perch hadn't reacted to Reina's headbutt, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see no major action taken - perhaps a yellow each. Fact is, Reina headbutted Perch, and that's unarguably a red card - nothing that Perch did wronged Reina.
RAWK Goes Into Meltdown (2011/2012)
- Thread starter Plan M
- Start date
It's not that straightforward - referees will often chicken out of big decisions given half a chance. If Perch hadn't reacted to Reina's headbutt, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see no major action taken - perhaps a yellow each. Fact is, Reina headbutted Perch, and that's unarguably a red card - nothing that Perch did wronged Reina.
Cleaning Lady > Andy Carroll
Neither would I. Considering that Reina barely touched him.
http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=283821.msg10119464#msg10119464
feck me - stick a fiver on United. Moan when they actually win and you can collect.
feck me - stick a fiver on United. Moan when they actually win and you can collect.
You can argue that the rules are senseless if you want, but every player should know that as things stand right now this is a straight red:
True but that elbow was part of a tussle for the ball, and such things can happen when players are wholeheartedly challenging for it - was a foul on scholes but nothing sinister. Contrast this to the Reina situation where it was a clash purely when play had already totally stopped.
Sometimes i'm not so sure about intent, but more so that sticking your face into another players brings the game into disrepute more than anything else.
You can argue that the rules are senseless if you want, but every player should know that as things stand right now this is a straight red:
I have never argued otherwise.
Still, if Perch stands his ground, do you think Reina is sent off? I don't.
He barely touched him - but he did touch him, and that's a red. I disagree with what Perch did, but the odds are that if he didn't go down, the referee would not have given the red. That is why I can understand why he did it, even if I disagree with it. It isn't the fault of players that referees don't always want to give the big decisions, but that's another argument.
Why do you think that is?
Perhaps not. But should he be sent off in that case? Of course he should. You don't need to break someones nose to trigger that punishment - Reina went in with his head, and it's no secret that that's considered a straight red for violent conduct.
The real problem here is that if Perch doesn't go down the ref probably doesn't enforce the rule. Same thing applies when a player is fouled but stays on their feet. Encourages players to take the easy option.
Start a thread about the headbutt, will ya lads? I dont even think they've talked about it on RAWK as much as we have here.
Then the reaction of Perch should be irrelevant. But apparently it isn't.
Because the ref would not follow the etter of the law - he would chicken out. That's why.
Solid theory.
I actually agree with this. I don't reckon Perch particularly thought about it, but I don't think anyone here can pass a real judgement when the intensity and adrenaline of being a Premier League football is quite a unique thing. They do what they're trained to do, to win, by taking advantage of the situation. It's not the same as diving - Perch was headbutted by Reina, and if he hadn't reacted Reina would've most likely stayed on the pitch. It's just the way things are. Like being fouled and having to take a dive, knowing that otherwise no free-kick would be given.
Apologies for contributing to this off-topicness, forgot which thread I was in..
Who says it isn't? I say the only relevance it has is that it ensured the correct decision was made. And made Perch look a bit of a pussy. But this is football, not UFC, so that in itself is irrelevant.
Agreed ZZZzzzzzz
This thread is supposed to be about quoting funny/deluded shite from the RAWK forums. NOT for a debate about the rules of the game or specifics about a game Liverpool were involved in.
let's get back to laughing at the delusion and conspiracy theories, NOT arguing amongst ourselves about a boring refereeing decisions/outcomes.
Aye, fair enough, I'm out!
I'm not going to argue - we can disagree, plus this thread is for laughing at RAWK. I'm out!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Howard Webb was ref tonight... United won... and there is absolutely no controversy? No conspiracy evidence?
I'm disappointed.
I'm disappointed.
Don't be.
Our good friend A@A, agent provocateur extraordinaire, has started the night off with...
£40
Cheers Howard Webb.
As consistently funny as Morecombe and Wise that fella.
Weirdly inclined to agree with that
Delicious
:s
That's a great quote about the derby result.
They all seem to be obsessed with saying (or agreeing) that Young's no better than Downing, it's just the team mentality, and if they were switched, he'd be good in our team and Young shit in theirs.
I'm not quite sure how to take this, cos on one side it's quite a compliment and a slight on themselves (and partly true mentality wise) but on another it's complete bollocks, and I'm not sure why they're saying it. To avoid admitting it was a bad buy? Because Young turned them down?
Whatever the reason, it's still complete bollocks. Young has always been better than Downing. At everything. At Villa. For England. Always.
I'm not quite sure how to take this, cos on one side it's quite a compliment and a slight on themselves (and partly true mentality wise) but on another it's complete bollocks, and I'm not sure why they're saying it. To avoid admitting it was a bad buy? Because Young turned them down?
Whatever the reason, it's still complete bollocks. Young has always been better than Downing. At everything. At Villa. For England. Always.
It reminds me of a cartoon I once saw in a newspaper. Kid covered in mud wearing a football kit looking angry.
Mum "how did you get on honey?"
Kid "we lost, but only because they scored twelve lucky goals."
That's RAWK that is.
Mum "how did you get on honey?"
Kid "we lost, but only because they scored twelve lucky goals."
That's RAWK that is.
Lots of them said as much, mate. Some even added that Adam Johnson was better than Downing.
Yeah I've just noticed on the page after, they all basically shoot that down. Thank, feck.
Downing is mid table standard even on a good day.
Young is making a big step up this season from teams where he could get away with not being great every game. In terms of finishing and assists Young has pissed all over Downing and he hasn't really found his feet at united yet IMO.
I think he'll be even better for us next season, whereas Downing will likely be the same.
Young is making a big step up this season from teams where he could get away with not being great every game. In terms of finishing and assists Young has pissed all over Downing and he hasn't really found his feet at united yet IMO.
I think he'll be even better for us next season, whereas Downing will likely be the same.
That may be a bit racist. Sure didn't help that he used the term 'blacks'
RAWK's finest - Andy Allerton
"How this team can be top of the so-called best league in the world is a mystery. As people have said - just shows how laughable it is at the moment.
Dropping behind the other leagues by the minute."
If that's the case where does that leave Liverpool?
"How this team can be top of the so-called best league in the world is a mystery. As people have said - just shows how laughable it is at the moment.
Dropping behind the other leagues by the minute."
If that's the case where does that leave Liverpool?
Suarez's grandad was black so they have permission to say it by proxy.
From a thread titled 'Man City sign Aguero':
Heres another good one."They're shit but they know how to scrape a win. We'll play brilliantly and dominate at Blackburn, probably batter them in comparison to the Mancs but will we win 2-0? Probably not."
Just saw another Italian player admit to match-fixing. This will no doubt prove that we do it, too. I mean, how else do you explain our dominance?