The intent was to take down a player running through on goal. That event deserves a red. The fact we scorred is irrelevant. If VAR had have shown a studs up challenge to the knee in the run up, the goal would have been given and the challenge would have been awarded with a red. No difference.
1 Like
Maybe read the rules and perhaps the thread before so confidently asserting something provably false?
1 Like
Rules? Who cares what they say? The law’s an ass. It should have been a goal and a red, just because the rules are bollocks doesn’t alter that.
So, basically the standard @Klopptimist reply then.
I’m the dictator of the world and everyone should listen to me.
2 Likes
I’m happy that the process is in place as confirmed by yourself and @RedWhippet so nothing wrong there, just those supposedly applying the laws of the game.
So the only question us why didnt Coote wave “play on” and i think we all suspect why.
1 Like
5 Likes
Obviously.
3 Likes
The plant originates from South and East Asia, not France. You… (insert sweary insult here).
We speak English, you fuckwit.
Edit: instead of dragging this thread even further off topic, I will not respond to @Bekloppt ’s post below in yet another off-topic post.
The accepted English word is aubergine. This is an English-language forum. End of discussion.
Aubergine is French derivation of an Arabic word. You Cankerblossom.
2 Likes
You lot. This is a post-match football thread.
Take that shite elsewhere
Edit: I love you all btw 
4 Likes
There is a difference.
The challenge you mention would be endangering the safety of an opponent. DOGSO is a red if outside the box (and in the box if no attempt was made to win the ball, otherwise it’s a yellow).
Once a ref waves advantage (which wasn’t the case Saturday, he gestured no foul) then he cannot undo the advantage if it doesn’t lead to a goal. Same rationale applies to the discipline that the ref can give, it has to be downgraded to a yellow also.
1 Like