retired_smilin916

my god, it was only a usual bit of RS baiting and it's turned into another argument

Look, i'm over it. I've moved on.

The petition is very funny but every team has the element of that. Do United fans still want Uncle Malc out after he's "splashed" the cash and won the title?

Still - Liverpool to get dicked please.

retired_bball3378

why would he think 'hang on, last man' when it's not part of his decision making process?

retired_kris10nicole

Scatter wronger than in cricket threads.

Last man doesn't automatically equal red, you're correct. However, Gerrard wasn't that wide that he wouldn't have got a shot on goal. You can argue whether it's a foul or not, and you can argue whether the rule is right or not, but the decision for the ref once he decides it's a foul is clear. If Gerrard isn't fouled, no-one can prevent a shot on goal, and it's certainly a good enough position to warrant it being called a clear goalscoring opportunity.

As for the ref pulling out a different card, there's far too much being read into every nuance of a referee's actions these days. Who knows what was going through his head when he did that? Perhaps he pulled out his card, realised he's been hasty, and wanted a couple of seconds to think it through and get the right decision? And who knows what Gerrard actually said? Maybe he said "good decision, ref"?

The only thing i think we can safely say from all this is that anyone who thinks it's a "fact" that it's "patently" clear what someone was thinking, based not even on what someone said, merely the fact that they said anything, must be a clueless aussie who should get back to his colouring in and leave the footie talk to those who know something about the sport.

retired_smilin916

and fwiw, it should have been a straight red anyway (as i said in the match thread) only because the fool LOOKED like he'd been influenced by Gerrard were people bothered. If he'd have shown a straight red, you'd have had about 5 more pages of Hibbert Hate (than there already is)

retired_musiclova31

nice try. watch it again. red card in his back pocket, yellow in his shirt pocket. pulls out the yellow, stevie walks past, says something, then clattenburg pulls out the red.

and while i am basing it on a recollection that i could stand to be corrected on, gerrard was quite wide and on the edge of the 18 yard box. absolutely no guarantee he was denied a "clear scoring opportunity" at all.

retired_heidus17

uh, just because one event occurs between two others doesnt make it the cause of the 2nd

retired_kris10nicole

nice try. watch it again. red card in his back pocket, yellow in his shirt pocket. pulls out the yellow, stevie walks past, says something, then clattenburg pulls out the red. </BLOCKQUOTE>

don't need to watch it again, the order of those event wasn't in dispute. what i'm disputing is your cast iron certainty that there must be some causality between what Clattenburg does and the fact that Gerrard says something. Not even what he says, because we don't know that.

To put it another way, i've given you an explanation that's more plausible than yours for why Clattenburg might have done what he did that makes sense even if Gerrard says nothing.

if the player doesn't commit the foul, he's not in a position to stop Gerrard getting a clear shot at goal, imo one you'd expect him to score fairly often (the Russia game notwithstanding ).

I think the rule's terrible, by the way, but that's not what's on debate here.

retired_katie14

Think Gerrard’s body language suggests he was appealing to the ref in some capacity. He had his palms turned upwards and arms pushed out which doesn’t indicate anything like ‘good decision ref’.

retired_kris10nicole

Even if you take that as red, it still doesn't in any way prove that Clattenburg took the slightest bit of notice.

retired_musiclova31

you're suggesting a coincidence then mark?

old AND naive. awesome.