Coutts FA probe

[UnitedBlade]

They failed to get a unanimous verdict from 3 ex referees viewing it separately. A unanimous verdict that it was a red card is required for a ban.

So the ex refs probably had similar views and differences to the forum.
Obviously it was 2-1 but I bet 2 thought red card .

 

[Rusty view]

So, is Al fit then?

Should be.

 

[stringer]

Not as much as in your paper, mate...
Numpties pointing at grass verges?
Dear, oh dear.

Except that wasn't the story was it?

Tell you what, send me your address and I'll send you a copy of Saturday's. 16 page Derby special and my piece with Monty, who captained United in a Derby we paid to watch. How's that sound?

 

[Boxer Blade]

I cannot tell you how down I was yesterday, wilder,Coutts the strike force and it just has to be against fuckin Wendy, it don't take much but I am buzzin now, still won't be able to watch it mind

 

[Pinchy]

Except that wasn't the story was it?

Tell you what, send me your address and I'll send you a copy of Saturday's. 16 page Derby special and my piece with Monty, who captained United in a Derby we paid to watch. How's that sound?

It sounds fascinating...


What you could do, when you're not sycophantically 'liking' that numpty Biggs, simply because he's a fellow hack, is take up my suggestion that you carefully analyse your paper's Pig-loving sports pages for a month. I'll give £100 to a charity of your choice if it doesn't reveal more column inches, main headlines and photos in favour of the Pigs over us. That's the Star's Way. T'was ever thus.

 

[speedymcgeady]

He and his family are Chesterfield fans

Bounce bricks off his head, I say,but NOT in our stadium,do it discreetly, in the street.

 

[LJBlade]

FFS!

Best midfielder likely out, best strikers out, the football gods have woke up after their gap year haven't they?

All eyes are understandably on the derby but with Wolves and Forest following closely behind we could easily follow the four straight wins with four straight defeats.

Don't play Hammond mk 2 in Lundstrum at the sty we will get our pants pulled down in midfield if we do.

I see you've been on the happy pills again.....

 

[Pinchy]

They failed to get a unanimous verdict from 3 ex referees viewing it separately. A unanimous verdict that it was a red card is required for a ban.

So the ex refs probably had similar views and differences to the forum.
Obviously it was 2-1 but I bet 2 thought red card .

It says 'majority' not 'unanimous' so in fact the reverse must be the case...

 

[Slim Man]

Of course they would. Why on Earth not?

He’s a very lucky boy. Pull your head out of your arse.

 

[stringer]

What you could do, when you're not sycophantically 'liking' that numpty Biggs, simply because he's a fellow hack, is take up my suggestion that you carefully analyse your paper's Pig-loving sports pages for a month. I'll give £100 to a charity of your choice if it doesn't reveal more column inches, main headlines and photos in favour of the Pigs over us. That's the Star's Way. T'was ever thus.

I 'liked' Biggs because I know him personally and professionally, far better than you do I'd wager. I remember your suggestion; 'My nonsense suspicion of bias must be true and someone else must spend time and energy disproving it rather than me offering any proof whatsoever.'
Do you have a month in mind? Let's have the parameters nailed down.

 

[sitwell]

He’s a very lucky boy. Pull your head out of your arse.

Not lucky at all ,unlucky some twat decided to bring it up.

 

[Sheffsteel]

Doesn't surprise me he's been cleared.

My view is that the elbow was probably a yellow, so that would have ended up a red card on the day.

But it's borderline opinion whether it's a straight red, some refs would give a red and others would give a yellow.

The main issue regards retrospective punishment is that the crime needs to be crystal clear and obvious.

Fortunately for us the Coutts elbow isn't conclusive. Looked like it was the forearm that made contact not the elbow and its not clear if it was deliberate or malicious.

This kind of proves that even with video evidence and multiple camera angles it can still be difficult to agree a decision.

 

[UnitedBlade]

It says 'majority' not 'unanimous' so in fact the reverse must be the case...

It does but that can't be correct. If there's 3, it's either 2-1 majority red card or 2-1 majority not a red card. That doesn't make sense. Getting unanimous is clear. Of course that could be unanimously for or against.

I think he must have meant unanimous because majority in this instance doesn't make sense.

By the way, I think I've read in a separate article on the process that they all have to agree.

 

[Stretch]

He’s a very lucky boy. Pull your head out of your arse.

Not lucky at all ,unlucky some twat decided to bring it up.

I would say the real luck is that he didn't get yellow carded on the day and then get sent off anyway. It was never a straight red, I was confident of this yesterday after repeated views of the replay and remain so now.

In terms of who reported It, was it Norwich then or someone from officialdom?

 

[The Crab]

x 1000


GET IN! Really thought he'd be banned.

There goes Wednesday's chance of dominating possession.

Now come on Clayton, heal..... HEAL.....

 

[The Crab]

People say this is all karma for McCabe having the temerity to sue the academy of football , Wet Sham , Sir Trevor etc etc and then win the PL case.
I'm not sure about that.
Where he went wrong , I think , was taking a shit on that statue of Bobby Moore outside Wembley , When Martin Samuels was watching.

He did indeed go wrong. He should have taken a shit on Samuels instead

 

[ZoneManWilf]

So no action against Coutts, which means the cunt rolling around was " simulating" an injury......
I hope that his histrionics and play acting will be looked at, but I doubt it.

And their keeper inciting the kop. But I doubt it.

 

[The Crab]

Farke off?

Farked if I know.

 

[Grecian2000]

He’s a very lucky boy. Pull your head out of your arse.

LUCKY???
He's been investigated for a cheat pretending to be hurt (he wasn't, as his getting back up when he wasn't getting Coutts into trouble proves) after a bit of contact.
It's a contact sport, pretending to be hurt is NOT part of it.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

They failed to get a unanimous verdict from 3 ex referees viewing it separately. A unanimous verdict that it was a red card is required for a ban.

So the ex refs probably had similar views and differences to the forum.
Obviously it was 2-1 but I bet 2 thought red card .

They needed a majority decision, not a unanimous one, so at the most 1 thought it was a red card offence. The other two either said it wasn't or they couldn't decide.

I would imagine that had they been asked if it had been at least worthy of a yellow card there would have been a unanimous verdict that it should have been.

 

[S5Blade]

I 'liked' Biggs because I know him personally and professionally, far better than you do I'd wager. I remember your suggestion; 'My nonsense suspicion of bias must be true and someone else must spend time and energy disproving it rather than me offering any proof whatsoever.'
Do you have a month in mind? Let's have the parameters nailed down.

 

[Pinchy]

I 'liked' Biggs because I know him personally and professionally, far better than you do I'd wager. I remember your suggestion; 'My nonsense suspicion of bias must be true and someone else must spend time and energy disproving it rather than me offering any proof whatsoever.'
Do you have a month in mind? Let's have the parameters nailed down.

October will be fine. Send me a copy of the paper every day that month. I'll pay, of course, not being a freeloader. I'm not having the issue decided by the office tea boy.

It's not nonsense; the bias is patent, as any empirical analysis will confirm, unless of course you tip the sub-editor off, which wouldn't surprise me in the least.

I speak, by the way, from over fifty years experience, which you might, on reflection, not dismiss so lightly.

Biggs is a third-rater, at best. That's why he ghost writes for Lee 'Who?' Bullen. Lee fucking Bullen.

Ask your mate about his commentary for RS on the Crewe-Doncaster game. I had the misfortune to hear it whilst watching some paint dry. It was excruciatingly poor.

 

[UnitedBlade]

They needed a majority decision, not a unanimous one, so at the most 1 thought it was a red card offence. The other two either said it wasn't or they couldn't decide.

I would imagine that had they been asked if it had been at least worthy of a yellow card there would have been a unanimous verdict that it should have been.

No, that's not the process. James Shield had incorrectly used majority when he should have said they failed to unanimously find that it was a red card. The process is explained in the article below. I think it's good because despite any referral the player gets the element of doubt.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.ga...trospective-refereeing-work-what-11173785.amp

 

[IOM Blade]

 

[IOM Blade]

View attachment 31031

Mwahahahahaha.

Bad joke. Sorry.

 

[Pinchy]

And their keeper inciting the kop. But I doubt it.

Immediately after feigning a life-threatening injury, he turned round with a mocking grin on his face. You can't condone throwing anything onto the pitch (well maybe a blow-up Pig next Sunday) but there was real provocation from that fucking idiot.

 

[Sean Thornton]

October will be fine. Send me a copy of the paper every day that month. I'll pay, of course, not being a freeloader. I'm not having the issue decided by the office tea boy.

It's not nonsense; the bias is patent, as any empirical analysis will confirm, unless of course you tip the sub-editor off, which wouldn't surprise me in the least.

I speak, by the way, from over fifty years experience, which you might, on reflection, not dismiss so lightly.

Biggs is a third-rater, at best. That's why he ghost writes for Lee 'Who?' Bullen. Lee fucking Bullen.

Ask your mate about his commentary for RS on the Crewe-Doncaster game. I had the misfortune to hear it whilst watching some paint dry. It was excruciatingly poor.

I wouldn't worry about anyone down there being tipped off Pinchy.

Today's online version has the Eating Out sections puff piece on the Milestones Early Bird menu down as "News".

Attention to detail clearly isn't that important.

 

[Pinchy]

He’s a very lucky boy. Pull your head out of your arse.

Oh dear, wrong and looking silly again, eh? It's becoming a habit, unlucky boy.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

No, that's not the process. James Shield had incorrectly used majority when he should have said they failed to unanimously find that it was a red card. The process is explained in the article below. I think it's good because despite any referral the player gets the element of doubt.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.ga...trospective-refereeing-work-what-11173785.amp

That'll teach me to trust the accuracy of James Shield's reporting!

 

[Sean Thornton]

That'll teach me to trust the accuracy of James Shield's reporting!

I have baby unicorns for sale.......