David Brown - Page 2

lancsdave · 28-03-2007, 11:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by AccyMad

makes you wonder if the FA even looked at it.

I think you are right there. As far as I know the FA don't look at it, they ask the referee if he would like to review his decision, in which case he was never going to win the appeal. Could be wrong.

maccawozzagod · 28-03-2007, 11:54

and apparently it cost five hundred quid?

Redraine · 28-03-2007, 12:53

Bulls bollocks from the Hereford forum:-

"No surprise there really. Only surprise for me was that Twatrington bothered to appeal at all.
I like Browner he gave his all here and still has a fair amount of ability but regardless of where it happened on the pitch he made no attempt to play the ball and viscously kicked Danny Thomas as he went past.
Straight red for violent conduct ......spot on. "

Viscously? How do you do that?

maccawozzagod · 28-03-2007, 16:01

that must mean it was a sticky tackle?

Redraine · 28-03-2007, 16:10

We should have blamed the pitch.

Kiwi John · 28-03-2007, 18:18

Having watched the incident several times,seemed like a clear 'hack down from behind' to me.Can't understand what the fuss is all about. ???

KiTChener · 28-03-2007, 18:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiwi John

Having watched the incident several times,seemed like a clear 'hack down from behind' to me.Can't understand what the fuss is all about. ???

Agreed, KJ, was definately deserving of a yellow, but, IMHO, as , in own half, nowhere near 'last man', no way a red.... sorry, mate, you 'had to be there'!!

Kiwi John · 28-03-2007, 18:50

I'll stand corrected but I always thought that by bringing someone down like that WAS deemed an act of violence,therefore the big red.
As I say I'll stand corrected.

Oggy · 28-03-2007, 21:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiwi John

Having watched the incident several times,seemed like a clear 'hack down from behind' to me.Can't understand what the fuss is all about. ???

Agree with you John, and I was there, thought Brownie had more sense. I knew exactly what the ref was going to do, why don't the players?

Dangerous play though, no way, three matches is far too harsh, but resistance is useless.

This last man bit is getting a bit irksome, since when could you not be sent off unless the goalie was the nearest player?

lancsdave · 28-03-2007, 22:07

Seems to be confusion about him being sent off because he was last man. The technical term for that is preventing a goal scoring opportunity and carries a 2 match ban. In this case it seems irrelevant if he was deemed last man because thats not what he was sent off for, in the opinion of the referee of course.

Lancashire Stan · 29-03-2007, 19:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by lancsdave

Seems to be confusion about him being sent off because he was last man. The technical term for that is preventing a goal scoring opportunity and carries a 2 match ban.

Now we didn't see any Bulls players doing anything like that did we

Haggis316 · 29-03-2007, 20:04

Graham Turner does not think he should have been sent off. See:

http://www.herefordtimes.com/display.var.1294013.0..php