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
theessexfox

Konchesky's Red Card -Ban overturned

Recommended Posts

Posted

It still beggars belief. It's such a bad refereeing decision, it's almost comical.

 

The forces against us are strong at the minute, unfortunately.

Posted

 

Konchesky is a clown and is not Premier League (or Championship) he deserved his sending off today for being 100m out of position on Villa's second goal and his idiotic taunting of Hutton after he'd gone right through him. No sympathy at all.

 

 

I actually thought Konchesky was having one of his better games. He wasn't at fault for the goal, the main culprits for the goal were James and Wasilewski for not fouling Agbonlahor. I'm really surprised by Wasyl not taking his chance to foul his man. Schlupp is also at fault for not running with Hutton. Konchesky was covering at centre half. Please don't use a harsh red card to slate one of our own players. 

Posted

They do, I've seen comments on different sites where fans are pleased a player is injured (Nugent this week) and now a player is suspended. Schlupp isn't a better alternative at all.

 

Maybe I'm wrong. Are you sure it's not just a case of people saying 'look, the manager probably won't drop Konchesky and I think Schlupp would do a better job there, so a timely suspension may oblige the manager to make a change which would be for the best'. But I genuinely don't think people are saying 'I want Konchesky to be suspended until the end of time so he never kicks another goddamn ball for as long as he lives.'

Posted

I actually thought Konchesky was having one of his better games. He wasn't at fault for the goal, the main culprits for the goal were James and Wasilewski for not fouling Agbonlahor. I'm really surprised by Wasyl not taking his chance to foul his man. Schlupp is also at fault for not running with Hutton. Konchesky was covering at centre half. Please don't use a harsh red card to slate one of our own players. 

 

Looking at it again, you're spot on there. However, this aside, I thought he was looking pretty poor. Sides seem to identify the flanks as a weakness.

Posted

Konchesky is a clown and is not Premier League (or Championship) he deserved his sending off today for being 100m out of position on Villa's second goal and his idiotic taunting of Hutton after he'd gone right through him. No sympathy at all.

Posted

Watching it again, it's difficult. Both are at fault. However when heads go in and there is clearly some movement, the ref is going to make a decision. It was either a red for both or a yellow for both. Hutton has got away with that one but when we are chasing the game, konch should have just walked away.

 

I don't agree that they did similar things. In fact even Knochesky's tackle only made minor contact and Hutton dived.

 

After that Konchesky had a few words, other than that, nothing. Hutton on the other hand (after diving) raised his hands and pushed Konchesky. Which you can easily get sent off for.

 

So Konchesky's been sent off for doing nothing at all whereas Hutton has got booked for something that is by the letter of the law a red card.

Posted

Wait people are actually blaming Konch for the second goal  :xmaslaugh: , have you ever played football!? Wasyl was sucked across, meaning Konch had to come across also, Schlupp should have been covering but instead was ball watching like the gormless fool he is instead of tracking the run of Hutton. You folk will use any excuse to blame a player you don't like.

 

Well I'm glad someone said it for me. Basic rules of defending - Konchesky did the right thing, Schlupp didn't. Schlupp is the main culprit for the goal. It's fvcking Alan Hutton, just track the fvcker and he doesn't score.

Posted

Completely bizzare. Fvcking cvnts in my uni bar cheering when Konch got sent off.

What an evening for being a bellend.

Thats Bournemouth Stevie boy! Hope you and Tom took a few down with you.
Posted

Well I'm glad someone said it for me. Basic rules of defending - Konchesky did the right thing, Schlupp didn't. Schlupp is the main culprit for the goal. It's fvcking Alan Hutton, just track the fvcker and he doesn't score.

 

I think I said that, first instinct was that Konchesky was ball-watching when the ball came across, but on a second glance it was all about Schlupp.

Posted

Can't blame Konch for the goal and he actually did ok today. Schlupp decided not to cover Konchesky but, in fact, stand next to him. This allowed Hutton, who had ran all the way from his own boxed untracked, and seemingly unseen, and made his way around the back to score. This is someone who hadn't scored for over 4 years. Only we could let someone like that score!! How Schlupp isn't aware of him I do not know.

Posted

I don't think anyone wishes any of our players any ill. They're just saying that a suspension could lead to us finding a better alternative in Schlupp.

 

And this has happened in the past. Injury to Lowe led to us bringing in Joachim in 92, and injury to Speedie led to Walsh getting the nod in the final in 94. In fact, suspensions and injuries and backroom bust-ups have been responsible for the initial emergence of many of our best players over time - Grayson in for Mills in 93, Heskey in for Roberts in 96, Izzet in for Parker the same year, Guppy for Ullathorne in 97.

How dare you!

Posted

I wonder if Kaspar could have given Schlupp a shout, or someone in the midfield. Schlupp not seeing him is poor but nobody seeing him and giving a shout is getting a bit ridiculous.

Posted

Hutton was mixing it all night, kicked Schlupp in the back with a high foot challenge.

With the incident with Konch, Hutton has reacted with violent intent and Konch gets sent off, bizarre decision ref!

Posted

It was arguably a yellow for the challenge, and possibly a further yellow if the referee heard what Konch said and it amounted to unsporting behaviour or whatever, so two yellows in one incident equals a red.

However, I'm pretty sure the original challenge didn't merit a yellow, and the ref didn't know what Konch said, so I don't think he should have got one yellow, never mind a red.

Hutton's shove was a clear a red card as is even possible. So the ref has got three decisions wrong in one incident. Shambolic doesn't even begin to cover it.

He's would have had to show him two yellows rather than a straight red if it was for two thing.

 

Absolutely nothing incident, a yellow card each to chill them out at the most.

Posted

This reminds me of that Beckford red card at Brighton a few years ago where nobody had any idea why he'd been sent off so the officials ended up making things up and contradicting each others' stories.

Posted

I don't agree that they did similar things. In fact even Knochesky's tackle only made minor contact and Hutton dived.

After that Konchesky had a few words, other than that, nothing. Hutton on the other hand (after diving) raised his hands and pushed Konchesky. Which you can easily get sent off for.

So Konchesky's been sent off for doing nothing at all whereas Hutton has got booked for something that is by the letter of the law a red card.

It was hardly a dive. That was a yellow card challenge from Konch. He clearly gets him.

The thing that made me find it embarassing was that Hutton was rolling about but as soon as Konch said something to him he jumped up as quick as anything.

The bewildered look on Konch's face when he got the red said it all for me.

Posted

Well I'm glad someone said it for me. Basic rules of defending - Konchesky did the right thing, Schlupp didn't. Schlupp is the main culprit for the goal. It's fvcking Alan Hutton, just track the fvcker and he doesn't score.

Hardly! Agbonlahor should've been fouled in the first place, then we let Benteke float a free ball over the back stick to Hutton. Granted Schlupp should've tracked Hutton but there's no way he's the main culprit in that shambles.
Posted

It was hardly a dive. That was a yellow card challenge from Konch. He clearly gets him.

The thing that made me find it embarassing was that Hutton was rolling about but as soon as Konch said something to him he jumped up as quick as anything.

The bewildered look on Konch's face when he got the red said it all for me.

 

Most embarrassing along with that is that Hutton has gone up to confront Konchesky and Hutton is the one who's more aggravated in it all and that showed in his actions. I can't fathom what the referee has seen which is different to every other single person who saw the incident.

Posted

Most embarrassing along with that is that Hutton has gone up to confront Konchesky and Hutton is the one who's more aggravated in it all and that showed in his actions. I can't fathom what the referee has seen which is different to every other single person who saw the incident.

Agree. Whatever the punishment from the incident both should've seen the same.
Posted

anyone got a vine/vid/gif? my wifi went down just before they scored the second and came back just in time to see cambiasso try an overhead kick. 

 

I genuinely misread "wifi" as "wife" there. Would have made for a more exciting LCFC experience.

Posted

Wait people are actually blaming Konch for the second goal  :xmaslaugh: , have you ever played football!? Wasyl was sucked across, meaning Konch had to come across also, Schlupp should have been covering but instead was ball watching like the gormless fool he is instead of tracking the run of Hutton. You folk will use any excuse to blame a player you don't like.

Wasyl wasn't just sucked across, he was on right wing by their box when they broke away.

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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