DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 62173--------------------------------------------------
S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: Adam
Date: April 2, 2023, 10:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Attwell needs to do what Hooper did yesterday otherwise this
will get ugly and out of control very quickly.
HT: I think he's done well so far. No cards yet which is good.
Nothing major wrong, very similar performance to Hooper
yesterday.
FT: Well done Stuart. He kept a lid on everything and had a much
quieter 2nd half. And ZERO yellow cards!
#Post#: 62179--------------------------------------------------
Re: S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: dave26
Date: April 2, 2023, 2:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I thought Attwell judged the match perfectly , let things go
was consistent and stepped in when he needed to , very little if
any of players surrounding him today as for Utd another poor
performance our season is in danger of finishing like a lead
balloon
#Post#: 62180--------------------------------------------------
Re: S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: Hendo
Date: April 2, 2023, 2:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
How strange to see Rashford withdraw from England duty last week
through “injury” but miraculously restored to fitness for today.
And not the first Utd player to have done so. I smell something
fishy (and it’s not the contents of Baldricks apple crumble) and
if Southgate has any b**** he should leave him out of the next
England match as we did ok without him thankyou very much
Mind you the lay off didn’t do him any good as he was c*** today
#Post#: 62185--------------------------------------------------
Re: S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: Boggle
Date: April 2, 2023, 5:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Probably a much easier afternoon for Attwell than he could have
imagined. He was aided by the fact that one of the teams was
seemingly entirely disinterested in proceedings.
On the point regarding international duty, there used to be
(perhaps still is) a process through which national association
could apply to FIFA to have players banned from playing for
their club for a period after the break if they felt that their
withdrawal from the squad was questionable. I recall the
Senegalese authorities imposing such a punishment in Papiss
Cisse meaning he missed Newcastle games when they doubted the
validity of his withdrawal from their squad. I assume that the
England hierarchy would be reluctant to upset the clubs by using
this, but I assume it’s still there if there are doubts about
the veracity of a withdrawal from international duty.
#Post#: 62186--------------------------------------------------
Re: S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: ajb95
Date: April 2, 2023, 5:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Boggle link ---
>
> Probably a much easier afternoon for Attwell than he could
have imagined. He was aided by the fact that one of the teams
was seemingly entirely disinterested in proceedings.
>
> On the point regarding international duty, there used to be
(perhaps still is) a process through which national association
could apply to FIFA to have players banned from playing for
their club for a period after the break if they felt that their
withdrawal from the squad was questionable. I recall the
Senegalese authorities imposing such a punishment in Papiss
Cisse meaning he missed Newcastle games when they doubted the
validity of his withdrawal from their squad. I assume that the
England hierarchy would be reluctant to upset the clubs by using
this, but I assume it’s still there if there are doubts about
the veracity of a withdrawal from international duty.
>
--- End Quote ---
Sounds like a overreaching of FIFA’s responsibilities for me
#Post#: 62189--------------------------------------------------
Re: S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: Microscopist
Date: April 3, 2023, 2:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ajb95 link ---
>
> [quote author=Boggle link=topic=4734.msg62185#msg62185
date=1680473222]
> Probably a much easier afternoon for Attwell than he could
have imagined. He was aided by the fact that one of the teams
was seemingly entirely disinterested in proceedings.
>
> On the point regarding international duty, there used to be
(perhaps still is) a process through which national association
could apply to FIFA to have players banned from playing for
their club for a period after the break if they felt that their
withdrawal from the squad was questionable. I recall the
Senegalese authorities imposing such a punishment in Papiss
Cisse meaning he missed Newcastle games when they doubted the
validity of his withdrawal from their squad. I assume that the
England hierarchy would be reluctant to upset the clubs by using
this, but I assume it’s still there if there are doubts about
the veracity of a withdrawal from international duty.
>
--- End Quote ---
Sounds like a overreaching of FIFA’s responsibilities for me
[/quote]
Not really - if a player is genuinely injured and there is no
international break then the player, lets call them "Sicknote",
misses one or two games for their club anyhow. Unscrupulous
clubs have phantom injuries so that "Sicknote" can rest and go
on holiday whilst rival clubs are Conscientious and send their
players on international duty - one of their players, lets call
them "Honorable", is injured and misses the next one or two
games for their club. In other words some clubs are looking to
gain an unfair advantage by holding their players back from
international duty.
#Post#: 62200--------------------------------------------------
Re: S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: jacksamuel21
Date: April 3, 2023, 8:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Microscopist link ---
>
>
>
>
> [quote author=ajb95 link=topic=4734.msg62186#msg62186
date=1680473915]
> [quote author=Boggle link=topic=4734.msg62185#msg62185
date=1680473222]
> Probably a much easier afternoon for Attwell than he could
have imagined. He was aided by the fact that one of the teams
was seemingly entirely disinterested in proceedings.
>
> On the point regarding international duty, there used to be
(perhaps still is) a process through which national association
could apply to FIFA to have players banned from playing for
their club for a period after the break if they felt that their
withdrawal from the squad was questionable. I recall the
Senegalese authorities imposing such a punishment in Papiss
Cisse meaning he missed Newcastle games when they doubted the
validity of his withdrawal from their squad. I assume that the
England hierarchy would be reluctant to upset the clubs by using
this, but I assume it’s still there if there are doubts about
the veracity of a withdrawal from international duty.
>
--- End Quote ---
Sounds like a overreaching of FIFA’s responsibilities for me
[/quote]
Not really - if a player is genuinely injured and there is no
international break then the player, lets call them "Sicknote",
misses one or two games for their club anyhow. Unscrupulous
clubs have phantom injuries so that "Sicknote" can rest and go
on holiday whilst rival clubs are Conscientious and send their
players on international duty - one of their players, lets call
them "Honorable", is injured and misses the next one or two
games for their club. In other words some clubs are looking to
gain an unfair advantage by holding their players back from
international duty.
[/quote]
Can you blame the players though? They are paid by their clubs
and don't want to risk getting injured in some irrelevant
friendlies and qualifiers. Maybe if Southgate actually picked
inform players rather than those who haven't played all season,
they might stop faking injuries.
#Post#: 62214--------------------------------------------------
Re: S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: bmb
Date: April 3, 2023, 10:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jacksamuel21 link ---
>
> [quote author=Microscopist link=topic=4734.msg62189#msg62189
date=1680508631]
>
>
>
> [quote author=ajb95 link=topic=4734.msg62186#msg62186
date=1680473915]
> [quote author=Boggle link=topic=4734.msg62185#msg62185
date=1680473222]
> Probably a much easier afternoon for Attwell than he could
have imagined. He was aided by the fact that one of the teams
was seemingly entirely disinterested in proceedings.
>
> On the point regarding international duty, there used to be
(perhaps still is) a process through which national association
could apply to FIFA to have players banned from playing for
their club for a period after the break if they felt that their
withdrawal from the squad was questionable. I recall the
Senegalese authorities imposing such a punishment in Papiss
Cisse meaning he missed Newcastle games when they doubted the
validity of his withdrawal from their squad. I assume that the
England hierarchy would be reluctant to upset the clubs by using
this, but I assume it’s still there if there are doubts about
the veracity of a withdrawal from international duty.
>
--- End Quote ---
Sounds like a overreaching of FIFA’s responsibilities for me
[/quote]
Not really - if a player is genuinely injured and there is no
international break then the player, lets call them "Sicknote",
misses one or two games for their club anyhow. Unscrupulous
clubs have phantom injuries so that "Sicknote" can rest and go
on holiday whilst rival clubs are Conscientious and send their
players on international duty - one of their players, lets call
them "Honorable", is injured and misses the next one or two
games for their club. In other words some clubs are looking to
gain an unfair advantage by holding their players back from
international duty.
[/quote]
Can you blame the players though? They are paid by their clubs
and don't want to risk getting injured in some irrelevant
friendlies and qualifiers. Maybe if Southgate actually picked
inform players rather than those who haven't played all season,
they might stop faking injuries.
[/quote]
My opinion - if they are willing to fake injuries because they
consider the game beneath them because it is just some friendly
or qualifier then they should not be picked again - ever,
whoever they are. They should be replaced permanently by the
players who still consider it an honour to pull on their
national kit regardless of the game. You don't want to do the
qualifiers, fine, you don't then get the reward of doing the
tournaments as you played no part in the team qualifying for
them. I bet they would no longer be spending a week-10 days
recovering and rehabilitating in Dubai, or wherever, during the
International breaks.
#Post#: 62236--------------------------------------------------
Re: S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: MCPridz
Date: April 3, 2023, 3:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
He probably knew he he probably wasn't going to get a game over
some players ahead of him he on current form don't deserve to be
ahead of him so binned it off
#Post#: 62239--------------------------------------------------
Re: S ATTWELL: NEWCASTLE V MAN UTD
DIR By: Jake the Peg
Date: April 3, 2023, 4:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Rashford was so badly injured he went on holiday to New York.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page