6 hours ago, ValiantHan said:

If the red card is overturned Blackpool fans have said that they want a replay with a different set of officials. 

 

If they appeal the FA will just increase the length of the ban. They have 3 options. They can rescind, which they won't as the referee didn't make a clearly wrong decision.  They can stick with the 3 matches, if the call was borderline between reckless and dangerous, which they have done with a couple of Vale appeals. Here they'd double the ban as it would be the club just trying it on. However,  Blackpool won't appeal once they've reviewed the videos. To be fair their manager should really be made to apologise to the referee.  He expended a lot of air about big calls being wrong. I think the video actually show the referee followed the IFAB guidance to referees. He may not have refereed to his, his players or their fans satisfaction.  He did make them in accordance with the guidelines issued to the referees, which is what he is supposed to do. One of Moore's strengths was how he handled questions on referees,  just we'll take a look at the video. We never got a ban extended and got one overturned. I wouldn't want to be a referee, particularly as it's clear quite a few players, managers and fans don't fully understand the laws as they stand. Takes a special kind of person to be abused by up to 32 players during a match, 2 managers and countless fans after and during each match. I believe the pool at lower levels is getting smaller as people just walk away.

7 hours ago, Santa said:

Does anyone remember the liner at Fleetwood away who flagged for a penalty for them but it turned out he also taught at a school round the corner from the ground?

I think it was the same game when Jordan Slew got sent off.

Yep, I was at the match, the sending off was a joke. If I remember right, he was brought in as a late replacement but it was a farce. 

1 hour ago, philpvfc said:

Yep, I was at the match, the sending off was a joke. If I remember right, he was brought in as a late replacement but it was a farce. 

The days before the 4th official?

5 minutes ago, Fosse69 said:

The days before the 4th official?

Wasn’t that long ago….i’d sat about 12 years ago. 4th official was introduced in the 90s. Perhaps he was the 4th official, they often have the 4th official as someone local. 

13 hours ago, ValiantHan said:

If the red card is overturned Blackpool fans have said that they want a replay with a different set of officials. 

 

New ride at Blackpool Beach: Cloud Cuckoo Land.

12 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

KS, Something did change before Vale changed personnel at HT and that change was Blackpew went down to 10 men, that change made a big difference to the game. The sending off made it logical to change to a more attacking line up which Smith did asap. Whether it was 3 at the back or 4 is a matter of debate, it was so flexible.

It isn't the tactics that have got us rooted to the bottom, it's all the missed chances. Give Smith his due he's trying to rectify that by playing Stockley and Cole together. It's also a problem that most of the wing backs have been injured and haven't played much this season.

Whether by luck or judgement, Smith's  approach and management of the Blackpew game was spot one.

 

 

Okay Darren

the amount of "he won the ball" [So can't be a red card] logic is genuinely scary from blackpool fans. 

 

Quote

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.

 

He clearly lunges in. The only thing that matters after that is whether you think it was excessive force or endangered the safety of an opponent. 

 

It's a marginal one, literally according to the law of the game. 

He won the ball??? Not exactly the cleanest tackle if you go in as he did and ended up sitting on the ball

20 hours ago, darren1810 said:

Can't agree there mate at all. He's all bitter and twisted regarding Vale and I know Humph personally. 

Why he felt Pope is relevant is a mystery to me. 

I absolutely agree we still have loads of issues and one swallow and all that malarkey but Pope come on. 

hes loves the vale like all of us do. and ok all that aside. have you watched the interview? if not go watch and you tell me where in that interview does he NOT make sense. ill wait.

 

9 minutes ago, RayWalkers40yarder said:

hes loves the vale like all of us do. and ok all that aside. have you watched the interview? if not go watch and you tell me where in that interview does he NOT make sense. ill wait.

 

When is his testimonial again or have I missed it ?

13 minutes ago, Brian Johnson said:

When is his testimonial again or have I missed it ?

again deflecting from the question. standard

 

10 minutes ago, RayWalkers40yarder said:

again deflecting from the question. standard

 

Is it this Tom Pope you are talking about?

Footballer who threatened to 'punch the f***ing head' of fan involved in row after it emerges the supporter has cancer

WWW.DAILYMAIL.CO.UK

 

30 minutes ago, RayWalkers40yarder said:

hes loves the vale like all of us do. and ok all that aside. have you watched the interview? if not go watch and you tell me where in that interview does he NOT make sense. ill wait.

 

I've watched it.

My point was given all his bile against the Vale stemming from him being released as he was finished. 

Then why was he a go to for an opinion.

He's had nothing but bitterness towards Vale. 

The queue of clubs clamouring for his signature proved that it was the right decision to release him. He's behaved like a pleb and continues to do so given his part in the Kidsgrove brawl.

It's only my opinion I'm sure I'm alone in my opinion but why would you interview a bitter and twisted person about a club they've continually digged at, including offering Vale fans on and derogatory comments about a person's mother. 

Almost akin to a reporter from the Bristol post asking Joey Barton about the appointment of Steve Evans.

5 minutes ago, darren1810 said:

I've watched it.

My point was given all his bile against the Vale stemming from him being released as he was finished. 

Then why was he a go to for an opinion.

He's had nothing but bitterness towards Vale. 

The queue of clubs clamouring for his signature proved that it was the right decision to release him. He's behaved like a pleb and continues to do so given his part in the Kidsgrove brawl.

It's only my opinion I'm sure I'm alone in my opinion but why would you interview a bitter and twisted person about a club they've continually digged at, including offering Vale fans on and derogatory comments about a person's mother. 

It's possible to love the song but not the singer. He was in my opinion absolutely spot-on about what we've got and what we need.