Shrimpsvoices

hmmmm....

Looked to me as though the ball slipped through Baz's hands for their goal.

MoM for me should have been Whitmore.

Cracking challenge, wasn't even a foul. I think the ref's made a mistake there.

To be honest for the whole game he seemed like a child who was a little bit out of his depth, trying to do the right thing instead of actually doing the right thing.

It was a foul, even Jim thought it was a foul.

Looks like we are appealing it

Gone_Shrimping wrote:Looks like we are appealing it

Seems daft to me; surely it's just going to mean a longer ban.

Phil Anderer wrote:

Gone_Shrimping wrote:Looks like we are appealing it

Seems daft to me; surely it's just going to mean a longer ban.

Too right....accept the ban as it stands and move on. Can't afford an increase in any ban.

Guessing they see it no differently to the Kenyon tackle which we successfully appealed.

Can't say I agree 100%.

Yup. Though I've said I disagree with the ref's interpretation on this one it's very clear from all the arguments on the other thread that he had every right to see it the way he did.

Unless he has since said "I got it wrong" I think an appeal is futile because the people making the judgment will (quite rightly in this case) side with the ref who had a good clear view.

3 match ban stays despite an appeal

Christies Child wrote:3 match ban stays despite an appeal

Just a waste of £1,000 to appeal when we have no money!

Why not all chip in and pay it?

We might get another free pie and some more drinks