Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
davieG

Premier League 2014/15 Stuff it in here.

Recommended Posts

Posted

Just because it's your fantasy doesn't mean its his...

I think it'd be most peoples nightmare tbh

  

Bit gay

lol it would more of a Tarantino movie than anything else.

Posted

Eh, it may not have affected today's result, but we're now missing a cm for three matches, while a relegation rival only lose one centre back for one match, rather than two for three as it should have been,

 

James decision is correct, if your going mad about the rather contentious fact that Clarke didn't get a straight red then I'm afraid your over analyzing. Thought the ref was reasonable on the whole. Bar the Hammond pen which is far from stone wall.

Posted

James decision is correct, if your going mad about the rather contentious fact that Clarke didn't get a straight red then I'm afraid your over analyzing. Thought the ref was reasonable on the whole. Bar the Hammond pen which is far from stone wall.

If James is a red, then Clark should have walked on his first yellow - in which case it would never have happened. It's inconsistent referring.

Posted

If James is a red, then Clark should have walked on his first yellow - in which case it would never have happened. It's inconsistent referring.

 

Don't agree with that, nor have I seen anyone else even suggest that. 

Posted

Don't agree with that, nor have I seen anyone else even suggest that. 

 

There's no difference between the two challenges - James' is strong and catches the man in a 50/50, Clarks is strong and flattens the man. If one is excessive force, then both are. If the ref wants to give James a red for the tackle and his part in the fracas, fine, but then he needs to show two yellows, not a straight red. 

Posted

There's no difference between the two challenges - James' is strong and catches the man in a 50/50, Clarks is strong and flattens the man. If one is excessive force, then both are. If the ref wants to give James a red for the tackle and his part in the fracas, fine, but then he needs to show two yellows, not a straight red. 

 

But Clarke's is nowhere near as high, not over the top of the ball, there in lie's the difference. 

Posted

But Clarke's is nowhere near as high, not over the top of the ball, there in lie's the difference. 

 

James takes the ball then a bit of the man, Clark gets nowhere near the ball and takes all of the man. Both were of similar force and control. There's nothing between them: if one is a red, then both are. 

Posted

James takes the ball then a bit of the man, Clark gets nowhere near the ball and takes all of the man. Both were of similar force and control. There's nothing between them: if one is a red, then both are. 

 

No as one is not high and over the ball. 

Posted

Clarks is as high as James was, it's only not over the ball because the ball had already gone.

 

IMO (and given you are yet to have one person on the whole of national television or on here agree with you, everyone else) he really wasn't.

Posted

It was pretty much a home sellout. The empty seats you could see were the away end, mouthbreater.

You may well be correct, but if you are going to call someone a "mouthbreather", the impact is reduced if you fluff up the spelling.

:)

Posted

I think you're probably right. We've almost reached a stage where many people are placing more importance on telling and showing other people that they are enjoying themselves, than actually enjoying themselves (if that makes sense).

Edit...the stage HAS already been reached...

 

Totally agree with that. I've thought it for a while. It's not just football either.

 

Ironically I read a tweet that summed it up - "social media is where people tell you what a good time they're having instead of having a good time".

 

I do use social media a lot but not when I'm out.

Posted

Hence the smiley.

I thought about putting a little footnote saying it was intentionally misspelt but thought "Nah, they're bright enough to see that".

Apparently not.

 

 

What a weird thought process that must have been.

 

 

"I know, i'll try to look smart by spelling words wrong. That'll show 'em".

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...