Joined: Jul 17 2015 Posts: 4673 Location: Sitting on the naughty step
matt_wire wrote:I'm not one to advocate vandalism but I'm surprised nobody has egged that mural yet. The man's a tosspot anyway, shows how petty he is that he was happy to manage our nearest rivals because we sacked him. And he's another armchair philosopher like JJB or Phil Clarke who think they're smarter than the average RL viewer. No mate you're a petty hot head who, if playing by your own rules, would've been banned for most of your average season.
Harsh. He gave his all as a player. It is fair to say that pre match myself and my mate Neil would chuckle about the interview he would have given to GMR the day before emphasising the need for discipline…it was a case of when not if PC would lose it.
Just my opinions unless it's a FACT, in which case it's a fact.
Joined: Apr 17 2014 Posts: 422 Location: The swamps of Warrington
The Speculator wrote:Some people say that "the players need to learn about making these kind of tackles". However, it seems likely to me that Vaughan has made that same type of tackle 100 times this season, and in such situations, where there are so many variables involved - speed, direction, movement, inevitable force, other players in and around the tackle, etc - there is always going to be a certain amount of randomness about where the point of contact ends up being. I don't think there was any malicious intent in the tackle whatsoever, and 99% of the time he'd make the exact same tackle and there would be a different point of contact and no drama. In which case, what is he really supposed to learn from it? Maybe that any upper body tackle now risks a red card, if you get unlucky. Is that really where we want the game to go?
He should probably learn that he needs to get lower. He was far too high for shoulder contact and if he doesn’t learn then he’s going to have this happen time and time again. The rules aren’t going to change, or if they do then it’s only going to get more harsh
The only reason they look up to you is because they chose to kneel.
Joined: Sep 20 2005 Posts: 1087 Location: The Yard
The Reaper wrote:He should probably learn that he needs to get lower. He was far too high for shoulder contact and if he doesn’t learn then he’s going to have this happen time and time again. The rules aren’t going to change, or if they do then it’s only going to get more harsh
Wow! Rules are rules and it's the players that need to learn? Well, that's quite the change of tune from when Makinson got banned, and you said: "I genuinely can't stand the MRP. Don't know what they do, or what they bring to the game. Handing out retroactive bans for everything has always been stupid as love and that's not even talking about the inconsistency and incompetence they exhibit in doing that stupid job. We need a new system asap."
Joined: Apr 09 2010 Posts: 12912 Location: The Moon
ratticusfinch wrote:Also telling Vaughan to get lower when Makinson jumped in the air AGAIN!!
I’m still baffled as to why Bell never received a lengthy ban for his assault on Ratchford. That was no accident.
And Makinson jumps in the air yet gets a 1 game reduction so he can play his last home game for the club. In that case you can’t have told Vaughan he should have jumped up. Yeh totally ridiculous statement by me but given some of the bans or none bans out the whole process is ridiculous.
For what it’s worth I personally thought the Makinson ban was harsh at the time but for me his was worse than what Vaughan got the same ban for but gets a reduction and Vaughan does not, I’d like to know how that is.
Joined: Apr 17 2014 Posts: 422 Location: The swamps of Warrington
The Speculator wrote:Wow! Rules are rules and it's the players that need to learn? Well, that's quite the change of tune from when Makinson got banned, and you said: "I genuinely can't stand the MRP. Don't know what they do, or what they bring to the game. Handing out retroactive bans for everything has always been stupid as love and that's not even talking about the inconsistency and incompetence they exhibit in doing that stupid job. We need a new system asap."
Yes, and nothing I said here contradicts that at all lmao. I was responding to a post that said "what is it that Vaughan is supposed to learn?". The lesson he needs to learn is obvious as his technique was all wrong for today's rules. It has nothing to do with my opinion on the MRP. You won't find me saying that he should be banned for 3 games or that I agree with that, because it's ridiculous. As have all the recent bans been for similar tackles. That doesn't change the fact that it's going to keep happening unless the players learn the lessons though, as Morgan Knowles and indeed Tommy Makinson keep finding out...
FWIW I dont have a problem with the rules themselves. I 100% understand the need to try and minimise head collisions and protect players and the game itself. I think the red card for the tackle was completely fair, even if I think we are seeing far, far too many red and yellow cards in general. My problem is with the MRP and retroactively giving out ridiculous suspensions as I don't think there is any evidence whatsoever that this is effective for achieving their goal and all its doing is harming the game and pissing off the fanbase, leaving swaths of players on the sidelines every week. A red card, and an auto 1 game ban due to getting a red card should be the punishment imo. And similar to football, you can hand out an auto triggered 1 game ban after you've accumulated 3-5 yellows or something like that. You can scrap the MRP or leave them to deal with stuff the ref actually puts on report and nothing else
The only reason they look up to you is because they chose to kneel.
Joined: Apr 17 2014 Posts: 422 Location: The swamps of Warrington
ratticusfinch wrote:Also telling Vaughan to get lower when Makinson jumped in the air AGAIN!!
I’m still baffled as to why Bell never received a lengthy ban for his assault on Ratchford. That was no accident.
You've got to be taking the mickey with the bottom part. He was being swung around by one of your players with his arm flailing, and Ratchford directly behind him lmao. I don't even think its humanly possible for him to have done that on purpose. Ridiculous suggestion
The only reason they look up to you is because they chose to kneel.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, oaksey1011 and 125 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
