| Routledge sending off 23:59 - Jan 1 with 12844 views | Gowerjack |
Sorry,
The ref got it right.
Petulant little kick from WR and the intent is enough for a red card.
Time to move on.
|  |
| |  |
| Routledge sending off on 10:43 - Jan 2 with 2091 views | QuakerJack |
| Routledge sending off on 10:00 - Jan 2 by johnlangy |
The ref got it right according to what the lino told him. The truth is it warranted a word from the ref to say 'Calm down and be careful from now on'. That's it.
The lino's were incompetent yesterday. Both of them. |
Between the three of them they managed to make three farcical decisions - Routledge red, Henry only yellow and the hand ball.... everyone else saw it correctly apart from them.... most of those who saw it correctly had probably had a few pints before and the night before... it's quite incredible really... |  |
| |
| Routledge sending off on 11:06 - Jan 2 with 2028 views | Morfa_Same |
There's no way that the FA can justify red for Routledge and nothing for Stirling, though they'll probably try.
It's the inconsistency that riles people. I would suggest that the inconsistency is largely down to which clubs the players represent. |  | | |
| Routledge sending off on 11:22 - Jan 2 with 1984 views | WxmJax |
And now we can add Cahill to the list. His kick on Harry Kane yesterday was missed by the officials but not TV and was clearly worse than Wayne's. Not expecting any retrospective action in either case. |  |
| |
| Routledge sending off on 11:28 - Jan 2 with 1964 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Routledge sending off on 11:22 - Jan 2 by WxmJax |
And now we can add Cahill to the list. His kick on Harry Kane yesterday was missed by the officials but not TV and was clearly worse than Wayne's. Not expecting any retrospective action in either case. |
Did you note that MOTD did not show it though.
It was a real kick in the back that hurt Kane and the lines man was standing right there.
He and MOTD bottled it completely. |  | | |
| Routledge sending off on 11:31 - Jan 2 with 1954 views | union_jack |
There's a very small part if me that is happy with the injustice. Without it I reckon we would've lost that game. It fired us up without a doubt.
Personally, I think it will be overturned. Not a violent kick, a stamping of the ground was all that happened. No histrionics by Henry means it didn't touch him. More histrionics by Routkedge for both the Green and Henry incidents may have seen the game pan out quite differently however! |  |
| |
| Routledge sending off on 11:40 - Jan 2 with 1940 views | WxmJax |
| Routledge sending off on 11:28 - Jan 2 by A_Fans_Dad |
Did you note that MOTD did not show it though.
It was a real kick in the back that hurt Kane and the lines man was standing right there.
He and MOTD bottled it completely. |
Only just seen it on Sky this morning, nice to see that they highlighted it. | |
| |
| Routledge sending off on 11:42 - Jan 2 with 1926 views | Shaky |
I'm abroad on holiday, didn't see the match and haven't seen a replay, but one thing is certain; Routledge is a dirty little so and so who has gotten away with countless little petulant digs and nibbles.
Perhaps his karma account just got reset. |  |
| |
| Routledge sending off on 11:55 - Jan 2 with 1904 views | JackSomething |
| Routledge sending off on 01:00 - Jan 2 by AngelRangelQS |
I wouldn't be surprised to see the FA take that stance to be fair.
It's a load of horse shit. You see leg breaking tackles go virtually unpunished (not just Henry's today) as well as blatant cheating and reacting in any way towards your opponent like Routledge did is seen as some horrific crime. Footballs got it all wrong |
Spot on. That challenge was horrific and yet all the talk is about Routledge's reaction, not why did the ref only give a yellow card for a violent challenge that could have broken Wayne's leg.
Our appeal should highlight the provocation (2 bad challenges by Henry seconds apart) and the fact that the ref failed to apply the letter of the law by only booking Henry. Who has always been a dirty c*nt by the way, remember him playing for Wolves against Wigan and his tackle on Gomez?
What may go in our favour is that the ref didn't see it, instead taking advice from his assistant. Perhaps they'll be more willing to overturn it in that situation.
Also, do the officials swap sides at the half? If so, wouldn't that have been the same assistant who didn't give the handball against Green? |  |
| You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocket ship underpants don't help. |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Routledge sending off on 12:44 - Jan 2 with 1835 views | somersetsimon |
| Routledge sending off on 11:55 - Jan 2 by JackSomething |
Spot on. That challenge was horrific and yet all the talk is about Routledge's reaction, not why did the ref only give a yellow card for a violent challenge that could have broken Wayne's leg.
Our appeal should highlight the provocation (2 bad challenges by Henry seconds apart) and the fact that the ref failed to apply the letter of the law by only booking Henry. Who has always been a dirty c*nt by the way, remember him playing for Wolves against Wigan and his tackle on Gomez?
What may go in our favour is that the ref didn't see it, instead taking advice from his assistant. Perhaps they'll be more willing to overturn it in that situation.
Also, do the officials swap sides at the half? If so, wouldn't that have been the same assistant who didn't give the handball against Green? |
Generally provocation isn't taken into account. Our best case is that there wasn't any violent conduct and that Routledge's poke with his foot wasn't serious enough to warrant a red card.
It's difficult to predict the outcome of these panels as the FA are so secretive. E.g. all we know about Monday's incident with Sterling was that they couldn't review it as the referee had already made a decision. We have no idea whether the FA believed the referee made a mistake and Sterling's actions should have counted as violent conduct. Makes it very hard to build a case based on precedent. |  | | |
| Routledge sending off on 12:48 - Jan 2 with 1828 views | MattG |
| Routledge sending off on 11:42 - Jan 2 by Shaky |
I'm abroad on holiday, didn't see the match and haven't seen a replay, but one thing is certain; Routledge is a dirty little so and so who has gotten away with countless little petulant digs and nibbles.
Perhaps his karma account just got reset. |
This is Wayne Routledge you are talking about, right? The one who plays for Swansea City FC? Or are you talking about a different Routledge?
I ask because the one you describe doesn't match the one who got sent off yesterday in any respect. |  | | |
| Routledge sending off on 13:06 - Jan 2 with 1781 views | karnataka |
| Routledge sending off on 11:55 - Jan 2 by JackSomething |
Spot on. That challenge was horrific and yet all the talk is about Routledge's reaction, not why did the ref only give a yellow card for a violent challenge that could have broken Wayne's leg.
Our appeal should highlight the provocation (2 bad challenges by Henry seconds apart) and the fact that the ref failed to apply the letter of the law by only booking Henry. Who has always been a dirty c*nt by the way, remember him playing for Wolves against Wigan and his tackle on Gomez?
What may go in our favour is that the ref didn't see it, instead taking advice from his assistant. Perhaps they'll be more willing to overturn it in that situation.
Also, do the officials swap sides at the half? If so, wouldn't that have been the same assistant who didn't give the handball against Green? |
I wondered about that too. I used to run the line at various levels of football and always changed sides at half time so if that is done at this level then, yes, it would have been the same assistant who made the calls on Green's handball and Routledge's nudge. |  | | |
| Routledge sending off on 13:09 - Jan 2 with 1777 views | dailew |
| Routledge sending off on 11:42 - Jan 2 by Shaky |
I'm abroad on holiday, didn't see the match and haven't seen a replay, but one thing is certain; Routledge is a dirty little so and so who has gotten away with countless little petulant digs and nibbles.
Perhaps his karma account just got reset. |
What a load of firking rubbish.
Even by the standards of the usual arsch dribble you come out with. |  |
| |
| Routledge sending off on 13:10 - Jan 2 with 1765 views | Tom1912 |
It was absolutely shocking that they only ended up with 4 bookings. Henry himself, should have had a yellow moments before for a dangerous karate kick.
Barton should have been booked early on for pulling down Sigurdsson when he'd beaten him down the right. He then committed a few more fouls before finally getting booked around 75 minutes in.
Clint Hill got away with kicking Gomis in the chest first half without a booking. Also had a few fouls second half too.
Leroy Fer literally picked the ball up second half while he was on the floor because he wanted a free kick. How is that not a booking for deliberate handball?
They committed 22 fouls to our 5, and yet we're probably going to be without 1 of our players for 3 matches because of an action that could never be construed as violent. An absolute joke. | | | |
| Routledge sending off on 13:12 - Jan 2 with 1757 views | Tom1912 |
| Routledge sending off on 11:42 - Jan 2 by Shaky |
I'm abroad on holiday, didn't see the match and haven't seen a replay, but one thing is certain; Routledge is a dirty little so and so who has gotten away with countless little petulant digs and nibbles.
Perhaps his karma account just got reset. |
I have no idea what you're on about there. Care to share any examples? | | | |
| Routledge sending off on 13:31 - Jan 2 with 1716 views | 3swan |
| Routledge sending off on 00:04 - Jan 2 by Gowerjack |
Two wrongs..
He kicked out at a prone player
All about the intent. |
If it was intent then he would have kicked him not given him a gentle tap.
The ref got the tackle wrong and the high studs showing tackle about 10 seconds before.
It was a slight reaction to a dangerous tackle which the officials should have taken into account. | | | |
| Routledge sending off on 14:10 - Jan 2 with 1662 views | felixstowe_jack |
The only time the referee made a good decision was when QPR kicked the ball straight into touch the Ref's Ass signalled a QPR throw in and was overuled. Not sure how the Ref could be confident that the assistant could get anything right in the 10 man brawl that followed the tackle on Routes especially hard man Barton shoving all and Sundry. Funnt they did not show that on MOTD. | |
| |
| Routledge sending off on 15:12 - Jan 2 with 1600 views | Phil_S |
Never a red card. |  | | |
| Routledge sending off on 15:36 - Jan 2 with 1534 views | karnataka |
I thought Routs showed incredible restraint. After a tackle like that, I'm sure there are plenty who would have stamped on Henry's bollux while the opportunity was there. He deserved a fycking medal, not a red card. | | | |
| Routledge sending off on 15:40 - Jan 2 with 1526 views | monmouth |
| Routledge sending off on 13:06 - Jan 2 by karnataka |
I wondered about that too. I used to run the line at various levels of football and always changed sides at half time so if that is done at this level then, yes, it would have been the same assistant who made the calls on Green's handball and Routledge's nudge. |
The one who saw nothing wrong with Green's blatant handball was a very smug self satisfied looking bald gimp, just like the ref. Thought the routs one had some lank greasy black hair. A proper dream team. |  |
| |
| Routledge sending off on 15:40 - Jan 2 with 1526 views | Borojack |
| Routledge sending off on 15:12 - Jan 2 by Phil_S |
Never a red card. |
It wont get overturned though there was a petulant kick tap call it what you like.
Our midfield is looking threadbare for January.
At least we have 3 easy games on paper West Ham Chelsea & Southampton |  |
| |
| Routledge sending off on 16:48 - Jan 2 with 1374 views | swan_si |
| Routledge sending off on 16:39 - Jan 2 by QuakerJack |
He didn't see his dog signing cheques either. |
he should think about buying a guide dog. |  | | |
| Routledge sending off on 16:58 - Jan 2 with 1343 views | midswan |
As posted on previous page...
From the FIFA website "A player is guilty of violent conduct if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball"
There is no way what WR 'did' can be construed in the above terms. Mistake was made and the ref/FA should man up and do the right thing,pretty much a Monk said post match really. | | | |
| Routledge sending off on 17:01 - Jan 2 with 1338 views | Shaky |
| Routledge sending off on 13:12 - Jan 2 by Tom1912 |
I have no idea what you're on about there. Care to share any examples? |
Routledge is an adept at what used to be called a professional foul. Normally I spot at least 2 or 3 per game; the sly little dig or push in the back, leaving the boot in on a tackle, using his body as a screen, etc.
Cynical attempts to con the ref designed to appear innocent that are nevertheless entirely deliberate. And the regularity with which he does it is bound to attract retribution. I know I would. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
