Ah that. If discussing at length you'd think they'd manage 140 characters to tell me.

Bailey was being churlish about the ref that had a decent game, using the no foul thing to show poor performance.

I stand by the fact there was very little that NEEDED to be given as a foul, a few things that COULD have been.

What he did was allow a flowing game to flow, rather than 'ruin' it by blowing when he didn't need to.
Irritates me officials get blasted for being fussy and ruining the flow, and this guy is getting grief for doing the opposite!

Posted By: megson, Jan 23, 11:04:41