comment by Macca: Emily Bishop's love child (U8194)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
Really gobsmacked the Villa player didn't get the same as Bamford for clearly punching Klich in the guts...How that is deemed not to be violent is incredible.
However this can work in our favour now as this clear bias towards Villa should give Leeds an extra edge and fire in the belly to right the wrongs if we meet in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope WBA beat the pansies
Calm down lads, calm down. Let's look at this objectively.
Kodjia goes down injured, it looks like a bad one. In similar circumstances we kicked the ball out of play. The "it's head not leg" thing is a red herring. The "play to the whistle" thing is also a red herring. The WRONG thing was that your player slowed down as if he was going to kick it out, then flicked it down the line to your other player instead.
Not only did he fool our players, he fooled the linesman as well, who had stopped concentrating on the play so didn't spot that your second player was offside.
Cheating pure and simple. Full marks to Bielsa for putting it right. If he hadn't then even nastier confrontations could have broken out in the remainder of the match.
Whatever, no wonder our players were furious. In the confrontation which followed both sets of players were to blame. The ref punished both Hourihane and Bamford for their part in the melee. He obviously decided that a couple of yellows was enough, probably under the circumstances quite rightly.
BUT, on top of all that, we had Bamford simulating being hit in the face, deliberately with the intent of getting El Ghazi sent of. Cheating, pure and simple. El Ghazi does get sent off.
Not unreasonable for the EFL to take the view that the ref had dealt with all the incidents in the confrontation, except for Bamford's cheating which he was clearly unaware of.
So, Bamford gets banned and El Ghazi gets his red card overturned. Seems all totally reasonable to me. Can't see what anyone is complaining about.
‘Let’s look at this objectively’
Bamford deserves the 2 game ban but for hourihane to get away with a violent conduct charge for that jab is ridiculous....and people wonder why Leeds fans think theres a vendetta.thats a Watkins dive,a canoe headbutt and now a hourihane punch that has been blind eyed
https://www.facebook.com/WALMOTtv/videos/2458309750848452/UzpfSTE3ODg3MzU5NTM6MTAyMTEzMTkwNzE2NTEwNjc/
Never been headbutted by a canoe before - sounds bad 🤣🤣🤣
comment by SKHMOT19 (U21893)
posted 1 minute ago
https://www.facebook.com/WALMOTtv/videos/2458309750848452/UzpfSTE3ODg3MzU5NTM6MTAyMTEzMTkwNzE2NTEwNjc/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saw it earlier on fb. Fooking hypocrites.
Surprised the ref didn’t book the ball for bringing down the villa players whenever they went near it ....
Atwell proper disgrace he is supposed to be refereeing no criticism of him in this whole farce - makes my blood boil -
Bamford incident is indefensible but Hourihane getting away Scot free is disgraceful.
Watched it over and over again and still can't understand why no action? It is just out and out assault - elsewhere you would be in court.
FA/EFL - pathetic organisations
FA/EFL - pathetic organisations
----------------------
I think your spelling of corrupt is wrong there .....
comment by SKHMOT19 (U21893)
posted 56 minutes ago
https://www.facebook.com/WALMOTtv/videos/2458309750848452/UzpfSTE3ODg3MzU5NTM6MTAyMTEzMTkwNzE2NTEwNjc/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Doesn't surprise me one bit, Villa are utter skum.
VOF - thanks for pointing out my spelling mistake.
I stand corrected!
EFL/FA are morally bankrupt - Too many examples to list
EFL RULING
The policy states: “For any league match played on or after the fourth Thursday in March, any team sheet for a league game should include at least 10 outfield players who featured on the team sheet for the league match before.”
The EFL added: “In the event any club breaches the threshold, they may be charged with a breach of Regulation 24 and the matter will be referred to a disciplinary commission.”
That means Leeds players involved the last game must be included in the 18 on Sunday to avoid possible sanctions.
You could still change your whole starting 11 and keep within those rules couldn't you?
If you replaced 4 of the outfield 10 with players on the bench, and dropped the other 6 from the squad altogether. You would still have 10 players who were in the previous team sheet.
Keepers are excluded so can be replaced anyway.
Doesn't sound like they have thought it through, unless I am reading it wrong?
comment by SKHMOT19 (U21893)
posted 3 hours, 55 minutes ago
EFL RULING
The policy states: “For any league match played on or after the fourth Thursday in March, any team sheet for a league game should include at least 10 outfield players who featured on the team sheet for the league match before.”
The EFL added: “In the event any club breaches the threshold, they may be charged with a breach of Regulation 24 and the matter will be referred to a disciplinary commission.”
That means Leeds players involved the last game must be included in the 18 on Sunday to avoid possible sanctions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't understand why this is a rule? You've got a 25 man squad, you should be allowed to make as many changes as you wish?
Players will want game time and for those clubs who sit in mid table, like Brentford, Blackburn, Hull etc might want to keep some players happy by playing them in the last few games in a season so that they can clock up some game time and it gives players a chance to impress. Not only that, clubs may want to throw 2/3 of their better young players into the team and give them an opportunity. To me, this rule seems as if it only diminishes a clubs ability to do this.
I understand the rule, if we were in 21st position, 1 point above 22nd going in to the final game.
Would you be happy if we were playing a side in 6th place needing a win to stay in the play offs and giving everything. While the side below played the side in 3rd guaranteed play offs and they rested their whole side.
We pull a great performance to earn a draw but the side in 22nd has a walk over win against a junior team.
I don;t think the rule prevents this from happening though
No, of course I wouldn't be happy, but that's the game. Besides, it's becoming more and more of a cliché now about sides who have "nothing to play for" being more difficult than the ones who do.
Even still, yes it would upset me but you've got 46 games to get enough points to keep you up/get promoted/finish in the play offs etc. You can't use 1 game against a "weakened" opponent as an excuse surely? It depends when you play teams and it all evens out over the season anyway.
For example, if Leeds were to play Middlesbrough, when they lost 5 games on the bounce, that's much easier than if Sheff United had to play them early season if they were unbeaten in 5 isn't it? Speaking hypothetically of course. So that game, on paper, looks more favourable for Leeds. But Sheff United can't turn around to the EFL if they finished 3rd because of that game and say it's unfair because they played Boro when they were in form and then played Leeds when they were out of form. See my point?
Yes of course, you clearly understand the rule, just disagree.
I understand your argument and reasoning too.
I do think there is a difference between resting 10 players, and your team being in poor form though.
Either way, neither of us think the rule works.
Yeah of course there is a difference, but the principle was that it the team becomes "easier" than what you'd expect them to be.
But as you say, yes I don't quite get the rule.
comment by McParlandTheGreat (U6150)
posted 14 hours, 15 minutes ago
Calm down lads, calm down. Let's look at this objectively.
Kodjia goes down injured, it looks like a bad one. In similar circumstances we kicked the ball out of play. The "it's head not leg" thing is a red herring. The "play to the whistle" thing is also a red herring. The WRONG thing was that your player slowed down as if he was going to kick it out, then flicked it down the line to your other player instead.
Not only did he fool our players, he fooled the linesman as well, who had stopped concentrating on the play so didn't spot that your second player was offside.
Cheating pure and simple. Full marks to Bielsa for putting it right. If he hadn't then even nastier confrontations could have broken out in the remainder of the match.
Whatever, no wonder our players were furious. In the confrontation which followed both sets of players were to blame. The ref punished both Hourihane and Bamford for their part in the melee. He obviously decided that a couple of yellows was enough, probably under the circumstances quite rightly.
BUT, on top of all that, we had Bamford simulating being hit in the face, deliberately with the intent of getting El Ghazi sent of. Cheating, pure and simple. El Ghazi does get sent off.
Not unreasonable for the EFL to take the view that the ref had dealt with all the incidents in the confrontation, except for Bamford's cheating which he was clearly unaware of.
So, Bamford gets banned and El Ghazi gets his red card overturned. Seems all totally reasonable to me. Can't see what anyone is complaining about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's alright saying Roberts fooled your players, but they were telling him to kick it out and it's not up to them, at all.
Funny that when you kicked the ball out, it was only after you were going nowhere, it took 5 passes until you decided there was nothing on and kicked it into touch.
Also, against Stoke, you carried on playing when they had a player down and it resulted in you scoring. So massive, massive hypocrisy from your players who all have massive chips on their shoulders.
Grealish is also a cheating diving little kant, waving an his hands asking for red cards every other minute. Kant
One off the first things kids learn when they play football, play to the whistle!..
Its a basic rule and one that is correct!..
Players do not have a right to demand any player puts the ball out, if they do than that's their choice, but, what happened in this game is something the Referee should have had full control over, did he blow his whistle?....no he didn't, so, nothing said that anybody should kick that ball out!..
But, as been seen, Villa have broken the same none existent rule themselves and got away with it!..
Tough on Stoke, it could be said very!..
The EFL have now done what their self picked Officials have done, they've treated it very badly and its leaving a sour taste, I think even neutrals that are against Leeds are thinking what the feck!..
comment by lufc - Harrogate (U6810)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's alright saying Roberts fooled your players, but they were telling him to kick it out and it's not up to them, at all.
Funny that when you kicked the ball out, it was only after you were going nowhere, it took 5 passes until you decided there was nothing on and kicked it into touch.
Also, against Stoke, you carried on playing when they had a player down and it resulted in you scoring. So massive, massive hypocrisy from your players who all have massive chips on their shoulders.
Grealish is also a cheating diving little kant, waving an his hands asking for red cards every other minute. Kant
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right in that it was OK for Roberts to ignore our players and carry on as normal. But he didn't. He stopped as if to play the ball out, waited for our players to stop, then flicked it down the line. Cheat!!!
Ahem... we at Villa don't do chips on shoulders, neither players or fans. You should try it.
Grealish gets battered every game. Dead right he waves his hands.
I didn't realise just how skummy villa fans are. And people call us skum
comment by McParlandTheGreat (U6150)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
comment by lufc - Harrogate (U6810)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's alright saying Roberts fooled your players, but they were telling him to kick it out and it's not up to them, at all.
Funny that when you kicked the ball out, it was only after you were going nowhere, it took 5 passes until you decided there was nothing on and kicked it into touch.
Also, against Stoke, you carried on playing when they had a player down and it resulted in you scoring. So massive, massive hypocrisy from your players who all have massive chips on their shoulders.
Grealish is also a cheating diving little kant, waving an his hands asking for red cards every other minute. Kant
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right in that it was OK for Roberts to ignore our players and carry on as normal. But he didn't. He stopped as if to play the ball out, waited for our players to stop, then flicked it down the line. Cheat!!!
Ahem... we at Villa don't do chips on shoulders, neither players or fans.You should try it.
Grealish gets battered every game. Dead right he waves his hands.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For such a supposedly good side you time wasted, dived & whinged to the ref more than any other side I can recall at ER.
Sign in if you want to comment
Bamford
Page 3 of 4
posted on 30/4/19
comment by Macca: Emily Bishop's love child (U8194)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
Really gobsmacked the Villa player didn't get the same as Bamford for clearly punching Klich in the guts...How that is deemed not to be violent is incredible.
However this can work in our favour now as this clear bias towards Villa should give Leeds an extra edge and fire in the belly to right the wrongs if we meet in the final.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope WBA beat the pansies
posted on 1/5/19
Calm down lads, calm down. Let's look at this objectively.
Kodjia goes down injured, it looks like a bad one. In similar circumstances we kicked the ball out of play. The "it's head not leg" thing is a red herring. The "play to the whistle" thing is also a red herring. The WRONG thing was that your player slowed down as if he was going to kick it out, then flicked it down the line to your other player instead.
Not only did he fool our players, he fooled the linesman as well, who had stopped concentrating on the play so didn't spot that your second player was offside.
Cheating pure and simple. Full marks to Bielsa for putting it right. If he hadn't then even nastier confrontations could have broken out in the remainder of the match.
Whatever, no wonder our players were furious. In the confrontation which followed both sets of players were to blame. The ref punished both Hourihane and Bamford for their part in the melee. He obviously decided that a couple of yellows was enough, probably under the circumstances quite rightly.
BUT, on top of all that, we had Bamford simulating being hit in the face, deliberately with the intent of getting El Ghazi sent of. Cheating, pure and simple. El Ghazi does get sent off.
Not unreasonable for the EFL to take the view that the ref had dealt with all the incidents in the confrontation, except for Bamford's cheating which he was clearly unaware of.
So, Bamford gets banned and El Ghazi gets his red card overturned. Seems all totally reasonable to me. Can't see what anyone is complaining about.
posted on 1/5/19
‘Let’s look at this objectively’
posted on 1/5/19
Bamford deserves the 2 game ban but for hourihane to get away with a violent conduct charge for that jab is ridiculous....and people wonder why Leeds fans think theres a vendetta.thats a Watkins dive,a canoe headbutt and now a hourihane punch that has been blind eyed
posted on 1/5/19
https://www.facebook.com/WALMOTtv/videos/2458309750848452/UzpfSTE3ODg3MzU5NTM6MTAyMTEzMTkwNzE2NTEwNjc/
posted on 1/5/19
Never been headbutted by a canoe before - sounds bad 🤣🤣🤣
posted on 1/5/19
comment by SKHMOT19 (U21893)
posted 1 minute ago
https://www.facebook.com/WALMOTtv/videos/2458309750848452/UzpfSTE3ODg3MzU5NTM6MTAyMTEzMTkwNzE2NTEwNjc/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saw it earlier on fb. Fooking hypocrites.
Surprised the ref didn’t book the ball for bringing down the villa players whenever they went near it ....
posted on 1/5/19
Atwell proper disgrace he is supposed to be refereeing no criticism of him in this whole farce - makes my blood boil -
posted on 1/5/19
Bamford incident is indefensible but Hourihane getting away Scot free is disgraceful.
Watched it over and over again and still can't understand why no action? It is just out and out assault - elsewhere you would be in court.
FA/EFL - pathetic organisations
posted on 1/5/19
FA/EFL - pathetic organisations
----------------------
I think your spelling of corrupt is wrong there .....
posted on 1/5/19
comment by SKHMOT19 (U21893)
posted 56 minutes ago
https://www.facebook.com/WALMOTtv/videos/2458309750848452/UzpfSTE3ODg3MzU5NTM6MTAyMTEzMTkwNzE2NTEwNjc/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Doesn't surprise me one bit, Villa are utter skum.
posted on 1/5/19
VOF - thanks for pointing out my spelling mistake.
I stand corrected!
posted on 1/5/19
EFL/FA are morally bankrupt - Too many examples to list
posted on 1/5/19
EFL RULING
The policy states: “For any league match played on or after the fourth Thursday in March, any team sheet for a league game should include at least 10 outfield players who featured on the team sheet for the league match before.”
The EFL added: “In the event any club breaches the threshold, they may be charged with a breach of Regulation 24 and the matter will be referred to a disciplinary commission.”
That means Leeds players involved the last game must be included in the 18 on Sunday to avoid possible sanctions.
posted on 1/5/19
You could still change your whole starting 11 and keep within those rules couldn't you?
If you replaced 4 of the outfield 10 with players on the bench, and dropped the other 6 from the squad altogether. You would still have 10 players who were in the previous team sheet.
Keepers are excluded so can be replaced anyway.
Doesn't sound like they have thought it through, unless I am reading it wrong?
posted on 1/5/19
comment by SKHMOT19 (U21893)
posted 3 hours, 55 minutes ago
EFL RULING
The policy states: “For any league match played on or after the fourth Thursday in March, any team sheet for a league game should include at least 10 outfield players who featured on the team sheet for the league match before.”
The EFL added: “In the event any club breaches the threshold, they may be charged with a breach of Regulation 24 and the matter will be referred to a disciplinary commission.”
That means Leeds players involved the last game must be included in the 18 on Sunday to avoid possible sanctions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't understand why this is a rule? You've got a 25 man squad, you should be allowed to make as many changes as you wish?
Players will want game time and for those clubs who sit in mid table, like Brentford, Blackburn, Hull etc might want to keep some players happy by playing them in the last few games in a season so that they can clock up some game time and it gives players a chance to impress. Not only that, clubs may want to throw 2/3 of their better young players into the team and give them an opportunity. To me, this rule seems as if it only diminishes a clubs ability to do this.
posted on 1/5/19
I understand the rule, if we were in 21st position, 1 point above 22nd going in to the final game.
Would you be happy if we were playing a side in 6th place needing a win to stay in the play offs and giving everything. While the side below played the side in 3rd guaranteed play offs and they rested their whole side.
We pull a great performance to earn a draw but the side in 22nd has a walk over win against a junior team.
I don;t think the rule prevents this from happening though
posted on 1/5/19
No, of course I wouldn't be happy, but that's the game. Besides, it's becoming more and more of a cliché now about sides who have "nothing to play for" being more difficult than the ones who do.
Even still, yes it would upset me but you've got 46 games to get enough points to keep you up/get promoted/finish in the play offs etc. You can't use 1 game against a "weakened" opponent as an excuse surely? It depends when you play teams and it all evens out over the season anyway.
For example, if Leeds were to play Middlesbrough, when they lost 5 games on the bounce, that's much easier than if Sheff United had to play them early season if they were unbeaten in 5 isn't it? Speaking hypothetically of course. So that game, on paper, looks more favourable for Leeds. But Sheff United can't turn around to the EFL if they finished 3rd because of that game and say it's unfair because they played Boro when they were in form and then played Leeds when they were out of form. See my point?
posted on 1/5/19
Yes of course, you clearly understand the rule, just disagree.
I understand your argument and reasoning too.
I do think there is a difference between resting 10 players, and your team being in poor form though.
Either way, neither of us think the rule works.
posted on 1/5/19
Yeah of course there is a difference, but the principle was that it the team becomes "easier" than what you'd expect them to be.
But as you say, yes I don't quite get the rule.
posted on 1/5/19
comment by McParlandTheGreat (U6150)
posted 14 hours, 15 minutes ago
Calm down lads, calm down. Let's look at this objectively.
Kodjia goes down injured, it looks like a bad one. In similar circumstances we kicked the ball out of play. The "it's head not leg" thing is a red herring. The "play to the whistle" thing is also a red herring. The WRONG thing was that your player slowed down as if he was going to kick it out, then flicked it down the line to your other player instead.
Not only did he fool our players, he fooled the linesman as well, who had stopped concentrating on the play so didn't spot that your second player was offside.
Cheating pure and simple. Full marks to Bielsa for putting it right. If he hadn't then even nastier confrontations could have broken out in the remainder of the match.
Whatever, no wonder our players were furious. In the confrontation which followed both sets of players were to blame. The ref punished both Hourihane and Bamford for their part in the melee. He obviously decided that a couple of yellows was enough, probably under the circumstances quite rightly.
BUT, on top of all that, we had Bamford simulating being hit in the face, deliberately with the intent of getting El Ghazi sent of. Cheating, pure and simple. El Ghazi does get sent off.
Not unreasonable for the EFL to take the view that the ref had dealt with all the incidents in the confrontation, except for Bamford's cheating which he was clearly unaware of.
So, Bamford gets banned and El Ghazi gets his red card overturned. Seems all totally reasonable to me. Can't see what anyone is complaining about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's alright saying Roberts fooled your players, but they were telling him to kick it out and it's not up to them, at all.
Funny that when you kicked the ball out, it was only after you were going nowhere, it took 5 passes until you decided there was nothing on and kicked it into touch.
Also, against Stoke, you carried on playing when they had a player down and it resulted in you scoring. So massive, massive hypocrisy from your players who all have massive chips on their shoulders.
Grealish is also a cheating diving little kant, waving an his hands asking for red cards every other minute. Kant
posted on 1/5/19
One off the first things kids learn when they play football, play to the whistle!..
Its a basic rule and one that is correct!..
Players do not have a right to demand any player puts the ball out, if they do than that's their choice, but, what happened in this game is something the Referee should have had full control over, did he blow his whistle?....no he didn't, so, nothing said that anybody should kick that ball out!..
But, as been seen, Villa have broken the same none existent rule themselves and got away with it!..
Tough on Stoke, it could be said very!..
The EFL have now done what their self picked Officials have done, they've treated it very badly and its leaving a sour taste, I think even neutrals that are against Leeds are thinking what the feck!..
posted on 1/5/19
comment by lufc - Harrogate (U6810)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's alright saying Roberts fooled your players, but they were telling him to kick it out and it's not up to them, at all.
Funny that when you kicked the ball out, it was only after you were going nowhere, it took 5 passes until you decided there was nothing on and kicked it into touch.
Also, against Stoke, you carried on playing when they had a player down and it resulted in you scoring. So massive, massive hypocrisy from your players who all have massive chips on their shoulders.
Grealish is also a cheating diving little kant, waving an his hands asking for red cards every other minute. Kant
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right in that it was OK for Roberts to ignore our players and carry on as normal. But he didn't. He stopped as if to play the ball out, waited for our players to stop, then flicked it down the line. Cheat!!!
Ahem... we at Villa don't do chips on shoulders, neither players or fans. You should try it.
Grealish gets battered every game. Dead right he waves his hands.
posted on 1/5/19
I didn't realise just how skummy villa fans are. And people call us skum
posted on 1/5/19
comment by McParlandTheGreat (U6150)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
comment by lufc - Harrogate (U6810)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's alright saying Roberts fooled your players, but they were telling him to kick it out and it's not up to them, at all.
Funny that when you kicked the ball out, it was only after you were going nowhere, it took 5 passes until you decided there was nothing on and kicked it into touch.
Also, against Stoke, you carried on playing when they had a player down and it resulted in you scoring. So massive, massive hypocrisy from your players who all have massive chips on their shoulders.
Grealish is also a cheating diving little kant, waving an his hands asking for red cards every other minute. Kant
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right in that it was OK for Roberts to ignore our players and carry on as normal. But he didn't. He stopped as if to play the ball out, waited for our players to stop, then flicked it down the line. Cheat!!!
Ahem... we at Villa don't do chips on shoulders, neither players or fans.You should try it.
Grealish gets battered every game. Dead right he waves his hands.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For such a supposedly good side you time wasted, dived & whinged to the ref more than any other side I can recall at ER.
Page 3 of 4