Crawley Vs Exeter City Match Day Thread

[ramone]

Ah, i see.

 

[geoffwp]

Age. Thats my bleedin excuse!!

 

[The Proper Chap]

Age. Thats my bleedin excuse!!

90 next week I hear.

 

[geoffwp]

90 next week I hear.

As old as i maybe id still see you off in a 60m sprint PC. The only thing you are quick at is taking the ****.

 

[The Proper Chap]

As old as i maybe id still see you off in a 60m sprint PC. The only thing you are quick at is taking the ****.

Why only 60m old chap ?

 

[Red Bill]

He certainly played the ball before the man but you're not allowed to come through the back of a player even if you play the ball first. Not since about 1985 anyway.

Anyway, we are due one like that as people have said.

Just done a bit of research on this. Apparently there is now no mention of a tackle from behind in the laws of the game. The term 'tackle from behind' was first introduced in 1998 but removed again in 2005. The rules now talk only about endangering a player as a result of a tackle, the is no mention of direction of the tackle.
There was guidance saying that it is not a foul regardless if the player tackled falls over the tracklers foot after the tackle is made though.
With this in mind, as Symour definitely got the ball, it was a good if risky tackle and therefore not a penalty.

 

[CWH-NYC_]

Just done a bit of research on this. Apparently there is now no mention of a tackle from behind in the laws of the game. The term 'tackle from behind' was first introduced in 1998 but removed again in 2005. The rules now talk only about endangering a player as a result of a tackle, the is no mention of direction of the tackle.
There was guidance saying that it is not a foul regardless if the player tackled falls over the tracklers foot after the tackle is made though.
With this in mind, as Symour definitely got the ball, it was a good if risky tackle and therefore not a penalty.

Thank goodness for that. 3!points and on to the the FA Cup. Thread Closed (Well I did open it).

 

[SEA Grecian]

Just done a bit of research on this. Apparently there is now no mention of a tackle from behind in the laws of the game. The term 'tackle from behind' was first introduced in 1998 but removed again in 2005. The rules now talk only about endangering a player as a result of a tackle, the is no mention of direction of the tackle.
There was guidance saying that it is not a foul regardless if the player tackled falls over the tracklers foot after the tackle is made though.
With this in mind, as Symour definitely got the ball, it was a good if risky tackle and therefore not a penalty.

I think what this thread proves is that hardly any of us, myself included, actually know the rules of football.

 

[IndoMike]

I think what this thread proves is that hardly any of us, myself included, actually know the rules of football.

Yes. Even the refs sometimes don't know the rules.
The nature of the game constantly raises doubts on whether an action is a foul or not. There is a lot of subjectivity involved, which is why refs differ in their interpretations and there is little consistency
I have also checked the rules and I'm still not sure if Seymour's tackle was a foul or not.
But, as a very biased fan I accept Mr. Kettle's decision of no foul with glee.

 

[grecIAN Harris]

Just done a bit of research on this. Apparently there is now no mention of a tackle from behind in the laws of the game. The term 'tackle from behind' was first introduced in 1998 but removed again in 2005. The rules now talk only about endangering a player as a result of a tackle, the is no mention of direction of the tackle.
There was guidance saying that it is not a foul regardless if the player tackled falls over the tracklers foot after the tackle is made though.
With this in mind, as Symour definitely got the ball, it was a good if risky tackle and therefore not a penalty.

Which is a load of b0!!0cks as every tackle you go into there is an element of endangering the opponent. The slightest bit of mis-timing or mis-judgment and that's it. As for the sliding tackle under those rules, they might as well outlaw altogether and gave done.