You are right about Jones, he was wrong to give a false reason for retaking the throw

But it shouldn't have made any difference, since we should (and according to Malky would) have allowed them an unopposed equaliser immediately

So it's not really worth getting heated about

Posted By: Old Git on October 28th 2013 at 15:35:33

Message Thread

Time to gel? (NCFC) - happy clappy hughes, Oct 28, 14:57:22
- Did he not bring on our most rapid player at the same time as Elmander? (n/m) (NCFC) - Thomo, Oct 28, 15:09:07
- Exactly what is "the next level"? (n/m) (NCFC) - CB41, Oct 28, 15:06:09
  - not relegation form? (n/m) (NCFC) - phrankin, Oct 28, 15:08:23
- On Gelling (NCFC) - SeattleSounders, Oct 28, 15:05:54
  - I think we play ok to the system, and create chances. Results will come. Other teams (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:15:21
- We didn't lose (n/m) (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 14:59:32
  - No offence Pants (NCFC) - SeattleSounders, Oct 28, 15:09:19
    - Going to see someone costs money (n/m) (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:11:01
      - Ultimately you have to get over the notion (NCFC) - SeattleSounders, Oct 28, 15:13:57
        
        I can handle a referee hiding behind lots of things, they all do. This time Mike Jones has (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:17:22
        
        Then I really question your belief in the basic (NCFC) - SeattleSounders, Oct 28, 15:25:31
        
        I've been battened down on here for referees for years on interpretation (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:27:54
        
        You are right about Jones, he was wrong to give a false reason for retaking the throw (NCFC) - Old Git, Oct 28, 15:35:33
        
        I would have been equally disturbed if we just let another team score (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:41:54
        
        One final question for you, be honest (NCFC) - SeattleSounders, Oct 28, 15:31:48
        
        nope (n/m) (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:32:40
        
        Try it sometime (NCFC) - SeattleSounders, Oct 28, 15:34:01
        
        You appreciate that an ex official has stated the same though? (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:39:12
        
        "change" (n/m) (NCFC) - SeattleSounders, Oct 28, 15:34:56
        
        and exactly what are you going to do about it (NCFC) - ghostof barry butler, Oct 28, 15:24:37
  - Without an official being so arrogant to ignore the laws of the game, we actually won (n/m) (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:00:22
    - You know we'd have let them score, yes? (n/m) (NCFC) - duke of york, Oct 28, 15:01:56
      - Then we'd have risked match fixing charges too (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:07:15
        
        I doubt it (NCFC) - duke of york, Oct 28, 15:14:35
        
        the problem would have been if fer's goal stood (NCFC) - SCC 28, Oct 28, 15:16:20
        
        Was he? Blimey (n/m) (NCFC) - duke of york, Oct 28, 15:20:19
        
        community football service too (NCFC) - SCC 28, Oct 28, 15:24:38
        
        Football invoking the spirit of fair play? (NCFC) - Johnny Comecardiff, Oct 28, 15:28:51
        
        this is one of your silliest posts. (n/m) (NCFC) - fal5taff, Oct 28, 15:14:22
        
        bizarre, I am sure this type of thing has happened previously with no charges laid (n/m) (NCFC) - phrankin, Oct 28, 15:09:15
        
        But you actually appreciate that letting another team score is match fixing? (n/m) (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:11:38
        
        I appreciate that it has happened many times before with no charges laid (NCFC) - phrankin, Oct 28, 15:14:51
        
        I would have been ok with this, because it would have been a decision made (NCFC) - pants, Oct 28, 15:30:30
        
        Actually, they could be interpreted that way (NCFC) - Johnny Comecardiff, Oct 28, 15:47:04
- great post (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Oct 28, 14:58:40

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.