In Shaun's absence

comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 3 minutes ago
Great that card rescinded, but, it doesn't actually address the challenge and of course it does not address the result, which unfortunately shows that cheaters prosper.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It also doesnt address that I lost £300.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure why you're whining about a minor bet.

Had you have bet a decent amount then one could understand it.

So, the card has been overturned, but why does the Millwall player not get charged with simulation? Also, it doesn’t alter the result of the game. My other half says if a penalty is scored but later it is proved to have not been a penalty that goal should be removed from the result. In other words the result would become 1-1. We would still have been cheated out of what would probably have been a win for us, but it would be better than the loss which we have to live with.

Why doesn’t anyone at the FA or FL use common sense when it makes its rules, or decisions?

comment by MaidinLeeds (U2464)
posted 4 minutes ago
So, the card has been overturned, but why does the Millwall player not get charged with simulation? Also, it doesn’t alter the result of the game. My other half says if a penalty is scored but later it is proved to have not been a penalty that goal should be removed from the result. In other words the result would become 1-1. We would still have been cheated out of what would probably have been a win for us, but it would be better than the loss which we have to live with.

Why doesn’t anyone at the FA or FL use common sense when it makes its rules, or decisions?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Goals usually change the mentality of the 2 teams involved.

Effectively saying that cheats prosper. Bradshaw should have got a 1 game ban ffs.

The ruling was that contact was made, hence the penalty was legit and no action against Bradshaw.

Berardi’s red was rescinded because with Phillips there it didn’t deny an obvious goal scoring opportunity

Rescinding the red and thus removing Berardi’s ban is the furthest they could go without saying the call was completely wrong.

Almost what many refer to as a “make-up call.”

Not sure how the contact is relevant - he still dived. There was contact on Bamford when he did his dying swan impression, how is it different?

Basically encouraging going to ground whenever there is any contact

I'm sure we'll get a few decisions for and against us more this season, time to move past this. It's a bitter pill to swallow getting cheated out of a game, but It's been happening for a few years with these bent refs.

comment by JonnyLosAngeles (My Dad was made in Leeds) עם ישראל חי (U9756)
posted 13 hours, 9 minutes ago
Rescinding the red and thus removing Berardi’s ban is the furthest they could go without saying the call was completely wrong.

Almost what many refer to as a “make-up call.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spot on

comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 15 hours, 45 minutes ago

I lost £300 because of this

-----------

serves you right

it's a mugs game brother !!