Leeds - shocking
-
- Posts: 2443
- Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 8:58 pm
- Been Liked: 970 times
- Has Liked: 232 times
Re: Bamford Charged
Has the villa red been rescinded yet or is that a different appeal? Could it be outrageously possible that both players are banned? You'd think not, but....?
-
- Posts: 1502
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2016 9:30 am
- Been Liked: 524 times
- Has Liked: 186 times
Re: Bamford Charged
Villa red card rescinded.
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: Bamford Charged
Finally common sense prevails and Bamford rightly gets his punishment,i just hope Leeds don't mount an appeal to try to ensure he can be available for the play-offs.
Between this farce and the spy-gate affair how much lower will dirty Leeds stoop.
Between this farce and the spy-gate affair how much lower will dirty Leeds stoop.
Re: Bamford Charged
So you simulate a violent attack on you by an opponent who would face a three match ban and you get a two match ban if found guilty
We do have some crazy rules. As another poster has suggested these offences should carry a hefty ban and I would suggest 10 match suspension and a hefty fine. That would in all probability stop this kind of behaviour immediately
We do have some crazy rules. As another poster has suggested these offences should carry a hefty ban and I would suggest 10 match suspension and a hefty fine. That would in all probability stop this kind of behaviour immediately
Last edited by mdd2 on Tue Apr 30, 2019 8:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 16751
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
- Been Liked: 3771 times
- Has Liked: 7571 times
- Location: Derbyshire
Re: Bamford Charged
Couldn't get my head around only getting a two game ban.mdd2 wrote:So you simulate a violent attack on you by an opponent who would face a three match ban and you get a two match ban if found guilty
We do have some crazy rules. As another poster has suggested these offences should carry a hefty ban and I would suggest 10 match suspension and a hefty fine. That would in all probability stop this king of behaviour immediately
Ridiculous.
-
- Posts: 3979
- Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1857 times
- Has Liked: 652 times
Re: Bamford Charged
Let's hope it's Patrick Banford.
-
- Posts: 2105
- Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:28 pm
- Been Liked: 492 times
- Has Liked: 411 times
Re: Bamford Charged
Absolute ******* fairy. Hope the next centre half he comes up against goes right through him and does some
real damage that he can cry about.
real damage that he can cry about.
This user liked this post: DomBFC1882
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:55 pm
- Been Liked: 378 times
- Has Liked: 165 times
- Location: York
Re: Bamford Charged
Agree a 3 match ban should be an absolute minimum.
Also, the Villa fans should be allowed to circle his car and laugh at him crying like a baby.
Also, the Villa fans should be allowed to circle his car and laugh at him crying like a baby.
Re: Bamford Charged
Disrupting influence soon sent packing.
-
- Posts: 30707
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11052 times
- Has Liked: 5660 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Bamford Charged
Maddison should be done too for getting Niles of Arsenal sent off too
This user liked this post: bob-the-scutter
-
- Posts: 814
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 180 times
- Has Liked: 97 times
Re: Bamford Charged
D..E...L...S...E...
that’s Leeds but fallen apart
that’s Leeds but fallen apart
-
- Posts: 10915
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5560 times
- Has Liked: 208 times
Re: Bamford Charged
Never thought I’d say this but stick to politics, Smudge.SmudgetheClaret wrote:D..E...L...S...E...
that’s Leeds but fallen apart
-
- Posts: 614
- Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:14 pm
- Been Liked: 200 times
- Has Liked: 44 times
Re: Bamford Charged
I can't help thining that his cheating might have changed the course of the whole game/promotion race, especially if their manager had refused to give the goal back. Despicable behaviour from the childish soft lad. Glad we ****** him off.
-
- Posts: 1869
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 1:33 pm
- Been Liked: 383 times
- Has Liked: 236 times
- Location: Skipton
Re: Leeds - shocking
At last we have proof that this is Bamford's true father
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiW0IPrv1Ro" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiW0IPrv1Ro" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Posts: 7312
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3964 times
Re: Leeds - shocking
Totally agree. Only just had time to catch up with this and watch the footage.ClaretTony wrote:And it's not even close. Interestingly, if the assistant had done his job, none of the rest would have happened.
As for Bamford, that little mard arse needs dealing with for that. Absolute disgrace.
Stuart Attwell is at the centre of it all, but when you analyse it, he's totally been done by his assistant who:
1. Fails to spot a fairly easy offside,
then 2. Does spot an offence on Bamford that again wasn't even close.
Mike Dean was on the touchline but obviously couldn't call the off-side, and must not have had a view of the Bamford incident, but based on the past couple of weeks he must be reflecting on how much trouble an inept assistant can put a referee in [Cardiff penalty award].
In the circumstances I reckon the Leeds centre-back, Frandsen is also lucky not to be charged. He clearly tried to prevent and disputed the "unchallenged" goal that had been agreed, and this is serious unsporting conduct that could have led to further problems both on the pitch and off if Adomah hadn't been too quick for him. He continued his behaviour after the goal too. Attwell could easily have sent him off to level up the sides but that would just have fanned the flames further.
But it's the assistant who could have prevented all this by simply doing his job.
-
- Posts: 67892
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32542 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Leeds - shocking
The Leeds defender, Pontus Jansson I think, has done nothing wrong. He's entitled to defend no matter what has or hasn't been agreed between the two sides. It's not anything the referee could have got involved with.nil_desperandum wrote:I reckon the Leeds centre-back, Frandsen is also lucky not to be charged. He clearly tried to prevent and disputed the "unchallenged" goal that had been agreed, and this is serious unsporting conduct that could have led to further problems both on the pitch and off if Adomah hadn't been too quick for him. He continued his behaviour after the goal too. Attwell could easily have sent him off to level up the sides but that would just have fanned the flames further.
But it's the assistant who could have prevented all this by simply doing his job.
-
- Posts: 3604
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:05 am
- Been Liked: 2625 times
- Has Liked: 1 time
Re: Leeds - shocking
He wasn't offside, not that it's really the issue. This whole incident doesn't leave much blame on the officials, apart from being conned by Bamford, but that's been put right now anyway.nil_desperandum wrote:Totally agree. Only just had time to catch up with this and watch the footage.
Stuart Attwell is at the centre of it all, but when you analyse it, he's totally been done by his assistant who:
1. Fails to spot a fairly easy offside,
-
- Posts: 7312
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3964 times
Re: Leeds - shocking
Really not sure about that. You can't have a player taking things into his own hands when everyone has agreed that for the good of the game an "unchallenged" goal should be allowed. It's clearly against the spirit of the game, and as such I think could be covered by the unsporting behaviour list of offences, and also dissent. Dissent both in defying the instruction to allow a goal and also verbal and physical after Adomah scored. The whole point of an "unchallenged" goal is surely to calm things down, not to inflame them as he did?ClaretTony wrote:The Leeds defender, Pontus Jansson I think, has done nothing wrong. He's entitled to defend no matter what has or hasn't been agreed between the two sides. It's not anything the referee could have got involved with.
(Anyway he plays for Leeds so he was obviously in the wrong )
-
- Posts: 7312
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3964 times
Re: Leeds - shocking
Appears offside to me - and to others, but maybe you've seen proof, in which case fair enough.NottsClaret wrote:He wasn't offside, not that it's really the issue. This whole incident doesn't leave much blame on the officials, apart from being conned by Bamford, but that's been put right now anyway.
-
- Posts: 67892
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32542 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Leeds - shocking
Whichever way you look at it, he's done nothing wrong. The referee cannot sanction a walk through goal and, no matter what's been agreed, he's within his rights to defend even though it wasn't the right thing to do.nil_desperandum wrote:Really not sure about that. You can't have a player taking things into his own hands when everyone has agreed that for the good of the game an "unchallenged" goal should be allowed. It's clearly against the spirit of the game, and as such I think could be covered by the unsporting behaviour list of offences, and also dissent. Dissent both in defying the instruction to allow a goal and also verbal and physical after Adomah scored. The whole point of an "unchallenged" goal is surely to calm things down, not to inflame them as he did?
(Anyway he plays for Leeds so he was obviously in the wrong )
-
- Posts: 7312
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3964 times
Re: Leeds - shocking
We'll have to agree to disagree.ClaretTony wrote:Whichever way you look at it, he's done nothing wrong. The referee cannot sanction a walk through goal and, no matter what's been agreed, he's within his rights to defend even though it wasn't the right thing to do.
Watch it back from about 5.30. He's totally out of control and virtually fighting with his own players who are trying to restrain him. If that was against us I'm pretty sure you'd be describing his behaviour as disgraceful. It's clearly dissent and unsporting behaviour. It also wound up the crowd, which was the last thing that the game needed when Bielsa had correctly (an bravely) tried to calm things down.
-
- Posts: 6419
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:36 pm
- Been Liked: 1835 times
- Has Liked: 962 times
- Location: cloud 9 since Dyche appointed
Re: Leeds - shocking
examples of unsporting behavior!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EUoaiUboFs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EUoaiUboFs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This user liked this post: bob-the-scutter
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:55 pm
- Been Liked: 378 times
- Has Liked: 165 times
- Location: York
Re: Leeds - shocking
I'm reporting the overuse of the word 'entitled'
-
- Posts: 16893
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6963 times
- Has Liked: 1483 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Leeds - shocking
Apparently Leeds are being charged for match-fixing. If you watch the Villa equaliser back pretty much the whole team let Villa walk the ball into the goal unchallenged. This could cost them promotion.
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Leeds - shocking
Huddersfield have been doing this all season!Rileybobs wrote:Apparently Leeds are being charged for match-fixing. If you watch the Villa equaliser back pretty much the whole team let Villa walk the ball into the goal unchallenged.
These 2 users liked this post: Rileybobs ClaretTony
-
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:19 pm
- Been Liked: 170 times
- Has Liked: 277 times
Re: Leeds - shocking
Really dont want Leeds to get promoted, horrible lot, I hope Villa go up, a brilliant away day out, fans are ok too. As for Bamford, his pathetic act deserves a ban hope he gets one.
Re: Leeds - shocking
nil_desperandum wrote:
Really not sure about that. You can't have a player taking things into his own hands when everyone has agreed that for the good of the game an "unchallenged" goal should be allowed.
Pontus Janssen didn't agree. He was playing according to the laws of the game, show me where in those laws 'everyone' can agree to do what was done.
Really not sure about that. You can't have a player taking things into his own hands when everyone has agreed that for the good of the game an "unchallenged" goal should be allowed.
Pontus Janssen didn't agree. He was playing according to the laws of the game, show me where in those laws 'everyone' can agree to do what was done.
-
- Posts: 67892
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32542 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Leeds - shocking
You are right. He was playing according to the laws of the game and has every right to. The only person who can take issue with that is Bielsa because he disobeyed his orders.Bullabill wrote:nil_desperandum wrote:
Really not sure about that. You can't have a player taking things into his own hands when everyone has agreed that for the good of the game an "unchallenged" goal should be allowed.
Pontus Janssen didn't agree. He was playing according to the laws of the game, show me where in those laws 'everyone' can agree to do what was done.
Re: Leeds - shocking
Title is not something usually associated with Leeds. Perhaps that is why entitled doesn't fit either!.Sutton-Claret wrote:I'm reporting the overuse of the word 'entitled'
Re: Leeds - shocking
Have a look at post #77 on this thread. Played on by a couple of defenders.nil_desperandum wrote:Appears offside to me - and to others, but maybe you've seen proof, in which case fair enough.
-
- Posts: 67892
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32542 times
- Has Liked: 5279 times
- Location: Burnley
- Contact:
Re: Leeds - shocking
Bamford gets two match ban but Leeds thought they could try and get away with it.
Whilst Patrick Bamford did not deny the charge of successful deception of a match official following our Sky Bet Championship game against Aston Villa on Sunday, the club did request a hearing to contest the penalty imposed on the player.
The club felt that given the circumstances surrounding the incident, including the extraordinary act of sportsmanship which saw our head coach Marcelo Bielsa demand our team to allow Aston Villa to score an uncontested equaliser, we could have a sensible discussion around the sanction.
We acknowledge that the FA panel did not feel that to be reasonable and the club therefore joins Patrick in accepting the two-match ban.
Bamford will miss our final game of the 2018/19 campaign away to Ipswich Town as well as the first leg of our Play-Off semi-final.
Whilst Patrick Bamford did not deny the charge of successful deception of a match official following our Sky Bet Championship game against Aston Villa on Sunday, the club did request a hearing to contest the penalty imposed on the player.
The club felt that given the circumstances surrounding the incident, including the extraordinary act of sportsmanship which saw our head coach Marcelo Bielsa demand our team to allow Aston Villa to score an uncontested equaliser, we could have a sensible discussion around the sanction.
We acknowledge that the FA panel did not feel that to be reasonable and the club therefore joins Patrick in accepting the two-match ban.
Bamford will miss our final game of the 2018/19 campaign away to Ipswich Town as well as the first leg of our Play-Off semi-final.
Re: Leeds - shocking
Had just seen that, Tony.
This bit is superb:
"The club felt that given the circumstances surrounding the incident... we could have a sensible discussion around the sanction."
A "sensible decision around the sanction". Classic.
Frank (Casper): we will never forget.
This bit is superb:
"The club felt that given the circumstances surrounding the incident... we could have a sensible discussion around the sanction."
A "sensible decision around the sanction". Classic.
Frank (Casper): we will never forget.
Re: Leeds - shocking
What a bizarre assumption from Leeds.
The right outcome - only problem being that it means Roofe will start who is probably better than Bamford anyway.
The right outcome - only problem being that it means Roofe will start who is probably better than Bamford anyway.
-
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 7:06 am
- Been Liked: 93 times
- Has Liked: 41 times
- Location: Colne
Re: Leeds - shocking
Leeds' statement should be that they do not condone what Bamford did and they have fined him a months wages