|
|
Post by Rod1883 on Apr 6, 2022 12:43:38 GMT
Just read on the Tranmere forum that both appeals unsuccesful and an extra game ban added for one - Morris. www.thefootballnetwork.net/boards/read/s383.htm?730,17148030 Presumably as both were straight reds for violent tackles then MacDonald is banned for 3 games and Morris now 4. |
|
|
|
Post by Colyton Gas on Apr 6, 2022 13:15:51 GMT
Always remember -FA Cup I think- Tranmere or their visitors bringing on a sub and the other player not actually coming off so for a while they had 12 players on the pitch.At the time the rules for lower league football stated that in that instance,the 45 minute period should be re started but not sure if the score was wiped out.Anyway ,that didn't happen but expect the officials were very red faced.
Tom Davies now with them .Liked him.
|
|
|
|
Post by gulfofaden on Apr 6, 2022 13:48:55 GMT
It’s kind of LOL that their appeal just led to a further game ban
|
|
|
|
Post by legas on Apr 6, 2022 13:53:39 GMT
I find it strange that they appealed both reds. One could possibly be seen as soft because their player seemed to slip. But the second was a really reckless and dangerous high foot and can’t believe they appealed it. If it’s that one that attracted the additional game ban then it serves them right!
|
|
|
|
Post by kylegas on Apr 6, 2022 14:15:45 GMT
I find it strange that they appealed both reds. One could possibly be seen as soft because their player seemed to slip. But the second was a really reckless and dangerous high foot and can’t believe they appealed it. If it’s that one that attracted the additional game ban then it serves them right! Same thing happened to Belly against (I think) Salford giving him a massive cut to the head, the player wasn’t even booked |
|
|
|
Post by clockendgas on Apr 6, 2022 14:52:00 GMT
I find it strange that they appealed both reds. One could possibly be seen as soft because their player seemed to slip. But the second was a really reckless and dangerous high foot and can’t believe they appealed it. If it’s that one that attracted the additional game ban then it serves them right! Hey their scousers,they'd tell you black was white if it helped them,nothing's ever their fault. |
|
|
|
Post by fintanstack on Apr 6, 2022 15:34:04 GMT
I find it strange that they appealed both reds. One could possibly be seen as soft because their player seemed to slip. But the second was a really reckless and dangerous high foot and can’t believe they appealed it. If it’s that one that attracted the additional game ban then it serves them right! Hey their scousers,they'd tell you black was white if it helped them,nothing's ever their fault. Would it be OK if a scouser read your posts and came to the conclusion that all Bristolians are complete bellends? |
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Apr 6, 2022 15:44:26 GMT
Hey their scousers,they'd tell you black was white if it helped them,nothing's ever their fault. Would it be OK if a scouser read your posts and came to the conclusion that all Bristolians are complete bellends? No …. But half of them are . 😃 |
|
|
|
Post by alanrg on Apr 6, 2022 16:03:36 GMT
The Morris high foot was the one getting the extra ban
|
|
|
|
Post by clockendgas on Apr 6, 2022 16:55:40 GMT
Hey their scousers,they'd tell you black was white if it helped them,nothing's ever their fault. Would it be OK if a scouser read your posts and came to the conclusion that all Bristolians are complete bellends? They are perfectly entitled to think what they want,just like me.😉 |
|
|
|
Post by gulfofaden on Apr 7, 2022 16:43:31 GMT
I find it strange that they appealed both reds. One could possibly be seen as soft because their player seemed to slip. But the second was a really reckless and dangerous high foot and can’t believe they appealed it. If it’s that one that attracted the additional game ban then it serves them right! Hey their scousers,they'd tell you black was white if it helped them,nothing's ever their fault. They would be still going on about thatcher in 2067. |
|
|
|
Post by curlywurly on Apr 8, 2022 7:09:42 GMT
I find it strange that they appealed both reds. One could possibly be seen as soft because their player seemed to slip. But the second was a really reckless and dangerous high foot and can’t believe they appealed it. If it’s that one that attracted the additional game ban then it serves them right! Hey their scousers,they'd tell you black was white if it helped them,nothing's ever their fault. Smart comment given the make up of our squad and coaching staff. |
|
