15 minutes of fame? Thank you so much!

I think the Ref should have a RED CARD for time wasting.
Was his Brother the Ref in charge of the Wales / France game.

No complaint from me about you calling the official 'porky' Robster! However…

In the modern game, when you tackle from behind in the penalty area, your only hope is to take the ball clean. Ball *and* man is always going to be a penalty, and there did seem to me to be significant contact. While the Brummie player may have made a meal of it, we would expect one of our players to do exactly the same at the other end of the pitch. As it took MON at least a year to persuade Heskey, going down when you are fouled is not the same as diving.

Mills: two-footed, studs showing. Don't particularly blame the lad, mind. Schmeichel's 'clearance' left him with a dreadful decision to reach, and very quickly. He made the wrong choice, but at least it's understandable. Don't think the ref could let it go. Red for me.

However, I think Beausejour was a little fortunate not to see red in the first half. When a player standing upright has a knee driven in his slats, it's an assault, not a tackle. Even my Derby mate, who spent the whole match winding me up, described that foul as "very nasty".

And I agree entirely with downsouf. When I heard that comment from Keown, I shouted 'BLX' at the TV. If a second yellow has to be worthy of a sending off in its own right, then there's simply no point in having a 'two yellows and you're off' rule. In fact, if players know that only an offence worth a red will get them sent off, there's barely any point in having a yellow card at all, because it has no power to caution the player.

A lot of what I would have discussed has been mentioned already.

The one thing I would like to touch on is the possible foul on King. I think I may be right in saying that the Birmingham player was the same defending who blocked Mills several times in the first half.

Technically obstructing him, but as it was shoulder to shoulder will never ever be given as a foul. At the time I mentioned to my mate, that I hoped the defender continued to use this tactic, because all it would take is one attempted shoulder block against a City player's back or chest [instead of shoulder to shoulder] and it would surely be a foul.

Second half, King plays the ball past him, the defender stands his ground, but rather than push his shoulder in to King's, pushes it in to his chest. Whether this is obstruction or penalty, I am unsure, but definitely a foul that I think would have been given in the Premiership.

The same defender will probably end up giving away a penalty in a game with similar tactics, but unfortunately this isn't likely to help Leicester in any way.

Keown bizarrely argued it couldn't be a foul because he didn't 'have the ball under control'.

A) There is no stipulation in any FIFA law/regulation that states this should determine the result of a possible foul

B) Of course he didn't have the ball under control my dear, he had purposely knocked the ball past the defender to run on to it.

But hey ho, 1 pt dropped for me, two wins against teams we should really be beating at home and we'll more than likely be in the top 6 come Saturday evening.

Mugged by yet another incompetant official, interested only in getting himself noticed on the telly.

----------------------------------------------------------

Clear penalty and a clear sending off ...... get over it ....

Let's be honest, for the penalty there was definite contact with the player by Andy King. He got a piece of the ball, but if it was down the other end we would have wanted a pen. The guy went down as if a sniper had taken him out, but unfortunately that seems to be standard fare these days. As for the sending off, my first reaction was that the ref got it horribly wrong. BUT, having seen the replay, it was a 2 footed lunge. Yes he took the ball, but the laws now say it is a red.
In my opinion, without those 2 decisions Birmingham would never have won the game - but the decisions were correct.

Ref got both decisions right, you can have no real complaint.

Groby - he didn't get any of the ball. On the slow motion replays on telly, the Birmingham player with the long name gets there first, touches it away, then a moment later gets caught. Unequivocal penalty.

Back to the penalty shout at the other end, I believe King probably did have the ball under control, but I can't see how obstruction/any foul can be given when the defender moves so little. King has to try to go around him and he doesn't. If a penalty were given against us for something like that, I'd be livid.

I've not looked at it again today, but from the replay yesterday, I was sure that the defending moved the side of his body and leg towards where the ball would have been if King hadn't played it past him.

For me, if he doesn't get there first and as a result, blocks King from running on to a ball he knocked forward, it's a foul.

I personally don't agree with the obstruction rule; I can't see why it shouldn't just be given as a direct free-kick like any other foul. Surely all fouls are about causing an obstruction.

I do agree though, if it was given as a penalty against us I'd be very upset; but also not surprised.

In any case, our loss wasn't pinned on that decision, but I think generally the obstruction rule and whether it is outdated now is an interesting dilemma.

PS - I am 100% sure if that was in our own half, and King knocked the ball past an opposition player to run on to it, ref definitely gives a free kick. But we all already know how inconsistent such decisions are. Such is life.

Grabbyfox, if it wasnt for the 2 brilliant saves your keeper pulled off the result would have been the same.

Both decisions were correct as you say, dont blame the ref, blame the two players who made very very bad judgements with their tackling

Good luck for the rest of the season