Start to finish. A cheating, nasty bunch of time wasters.

I do hope they get relegated.

i like west ham usually, but there was a bad streak in them , cheats and thugs today.

What can you expect from a team whose most famous fan is Russell Brand.Of course they are a media darling due to their London location and frequent mentions in Eastenders,i don't know if this has been mentioned but apparently they won the World Cup once who would have thought it.They could get dragged into a relegation scrap, but sadly will probably have enough quality to survive,shame as it would be amusing watching a quarter-full Olympic Stadium, when they hosted the likes of Burton or Shrewsbury, on a cold Tuesday night in December.

They complained at every single decision! The ref needed to clamp down on them but he was weak. This kind of thing never gets mentioned in the media after the game.

Some of the diving from Hernandez in particular, (from my view in the CFS) was so ridiculous I had given up getting annoyed and just thought it hilarious, but still the silly little Ref and his pals on the line continued to give them free kicks.

Yes their nastiness and feigning was unchecked by the referee team. Only the total thuggery of Carroll was punished. He also got away with one. 4 mins added at end was confirmation that the ref was not interested how much time they wasted.

So pleased I support a proper team.

What’s the point in the ref pointing at his watch every time somebody timewastes? The players know damned well he isn’t going to add any time on for it!!

7-10 mins should be the norm rather than the exception for most games. Supporters are getting short changed.
It took way over two minutes for the thug to get sent off and that was for that one incident alone. How the hell was only two minutes played??

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:What’s the point in the ref pointing at his watch every time somebody timewastes? The players know damned well he isn’t going to add any time on for it!!

7-10 mins should be the norm rather than the exception for most games. Supporters are getting short changed.
It took way over two minutes for the thug to get sent off and that was for that one incident alone. How the hell was only two minutes played??

Because the aim is for 30 minutes game time each half. 15 minutes is expected to be used up as a normal part of the game e.g. setting up free/goal kicks, getting the ball back for throw-ins or talking to players etc.

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:What’s the point in the ref pointing at his watch every time somebody timewastes? The players know damned well he isn’t going to add any time on for it!!

7-10 mins should be the norm rather than the exception for most games. Supporters are getting short changed.
It took way over two minutes for the thug to get sent off and that was for that one incident alone. How the hell was only two minutes played??

I would much rather do away with added time and use the system that is used in many other sports, the clock only running whilst the ball is in play. You could reduce each half to 30 minutes and we would still get more play.

I don’t see a reason to change the way the game is timed. Just punish slow play - and not with injury time but by booking players who are clearly looking to slow the game down.

If it was like ice hockey and the clock on the big screen stopped, the games would last over 2 hours.

But you can’t book players for taking part in the “how slowly can I walk of the pitch game”!! It’s a joke. 20000 people sit and wait while one guy walks/pretends to jog off the pitch, then the sub sprints on! I’d say leave them to it and carry on with the game. Rolling subs style.

Agree completely with OP though I can't see them being relegated. A very cynical outfit who targeted a weak referee and got away with all but the most flagrant offences.

The memory I'll take from the game besides Carroll's lunacy is of Cresswell pushing Tarkowski (I think) over whilst he was attempting to take a quick free kick towards the end of the game. All happened within 10 yards of where I was sitting - the ref plainly saw what happened but elected to do nothing about it. Really riled me and summed up for me the kind of unpleasant team they are. Not saying we're saints, but I'd hate to see a Clarets player do that.

As bad as they were Atwell was the weakest ref I have seen for a long time.

i was raging about cresswell not getting booked. Yellow card all day long!

Reminded me of us, Barnes throwing elbows and the team timewasting at every opportunity.

KRBFC wrote:Reminded me of us, Barnes throwing elbows and the team timewasting at every opportunity.

Not surprised especially as you think Barnes is a p rick. I really don't know why you bother.

taio wrote:Not surprised especially as you think Barnes is a p rick. I really don't know why you bother.

The irony in a Burnley fan calling out another teams nasty tactics. Nick Pope got booked for timewasting at Liverpool before half time, yes that's right.

Yep all teams to do it. But you'll use any angle to have a dig. But that's because you're a complete c0ck.

No that's wrong !! Nick Pope got booked in the 55th. minute at Anfield with the referee under severe pressure from the start of the game from the whistling of the Liverpool fans whenever Pope hung on to the ball for more than 2 seconds. Not sure how KRBFC thinks that the 55th. minute is before half time !! Perhaps he wasn't at the game.

skibum84 wrote:i was raging about cresswell not getting booked. Yellow card all day long!

Likewise, I was astounded when the ref didnt caution Cresswell. A clearer case of 'delaying the restart of play' or he could have had him for 'unsporting behaviour' on account of the push.

Mind you, how their no 8 avoided a card within the forst few minutes beggared belief.

Blakesheaven wrote:The memory I'll take from the game besides Carroll's lunacy is of Cresswell pushing Tarkowski (I think) over whilst he was attempting to take a quick free kick towards the end of the game. All happened within 10 yards of where I was sitting - the ref plainly saw what happened but elected to do nothing about it. Really riled me and summed up for me the kind of unpleasant team they are. Not saying we're saints, but I'd hate to see a Clarets player do that.

In fairness, Chris Wood did throw his international captain Winston Reid into the back of the net after scoring.

2 halves of 30 minutes of the ball in play would be the way forward.

Blakesheaven wrote:Agree completely with OP though I can't see them being relegated. A very cynical outfit who targeted a weak referee and got away with all but the most flagrant offences.

The memory I'll take from the game besides Carroll's lunacy is of Cresswell pushing Tarkowski (I think) over whilst he was attempting to take a quick free kick towards the end of the game. All happened within 10 yards of where I was sitting - the ref plainly saw what happened but elected to do nothing about it. Really riled me and summed up for me the kind of unpleasant team they are. Not saying we're saints, but I'd hate to see a Clarets player do that.

The funny thing you forgot to mention is the referee got the Initial decision wrong, Tarkowski clearly fouled Antonio leading to a free kick given our way. I thought the referee was fair to both teams, tried to let the game flow. He could have easily booked Kouyate early on but then he'd have been forced to book Arfield moments later.

KRBFC wrote:The funny thing you forgot to mention is the referee got the Initial decision wrong, Tarkowski clearly fouled Antonio leading to a free kick given our way. I thought the referee was fair to both teams, tried to let the game flow. He could have easily booked Kouyate early on but then he'd have been forced to book Arfield moments later.

Ref got the pen decision wrong, but it happens.

2 halves of 30 minutes of the ball in play would be the way forward.

Niggly, or you could say professional. This is modern football, frankly not much of a spectacle really.
One thing in praise of West Ham was their superior athleticism.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/ ... t-west-ham" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sky Sports are asking the question "Why is Chicarito struggling"?

I would suggest this doesn't need an entire article to answer. He's spending too much time looking for trouble; simple as that. He's not the player he was at United. I didn't think he posed a threat at all. He just seemed to want to aggravate our back four all afternoon. I have to admit I was very disappointed in him.

jlup1980 wrote:http://www.skysports.com/football/news/ ... t-west-ham

Sky Sports are asking the question "Why is Chicarito struggling"?

I would suggest this doesn't need an entire article to answer. He's spending too much time looking for trouble; simple as that. He's not the player he was at United. I didn't think he posed a threat at all. He just seemed to want to aggravate our back four all afternoon. I have to admit I was very disappointed in him.

He held the game up at kick-off whilst we had to watch him kneel down on the centre spot and pray to ' his god' followed by him reaching to the ground and blessing himself. How ironic that he spent the rest of his time on the pitch cheating, whining and moaning.

paulatky wrote:2 halves of 30 minutes of the ball in play would be the way forward.

Really come round to this idea, probably way too radical to get introduced anytime soon.

You'd still be there for around 90 minutes, but at least you'd know exactly how much football you'd be seeing. Wasn't it our game v West Brom where the ball was in play for about 55 minutes?

And you'd know exactly how long you'd need to hang on for at the end, it'd kill off all the tedious 'gamesmanship', subs trudging off, keepers going to opposite side of box for goal kicks etc. I reckon once someone tried it, it'd be like the backpass law, we'd wonder why we didn't do it earlier.

As for enforcing the existing time wasting laws, simply never going to happen, just wishful thinking I'm afraid that.