2019/20 Andre Gomes

[tommye]

I hope you don't have a Son because you might disown him now.

Not going the game anymore either until the ground name is changed to just Goodi Park

 

[tommye]

I hope you don't have a Son because you might disown him now.

No more stadium jackets st the Morri___s either


Ffs

 

[DanEFC92]

 

[mahermi1]

So if the roles were reversed and the tackle had been Gomes on Son you'd have been ok will a yellow seconds later switched to a red. My point was it was a yellow all day and Coleman got the same only a few weeks ago for a far worse challenge at Burnley. Referees just seem to make it up as they go along.

I agree the refs are poor, and take your point a out switching Gomes with Son, but here's my answer, I would have been okay with that, if Son had got the same horrendous injury as Gomes, how could you moan ? Three game ban or a year out. But I'll tell you this, Everton would not have had the temerity to appeal it like Spurs have done, or I would hope not, crass and a lack of humility and respect, don't think we're that type of club.

 

[Kever10]

I agree the refs are poor, and take your point a out switching Gomes with Son, but here's my answer, I would have been okay with that, if Son had got the same horrendous injury as Gomes, how could you moan ? Three game ban or a year out. But I'll tell you this, Everton would not have had the temerity to appeal it like Spurs have done, or I would hope not, crass and a lack of humility and respect, don't think we're that type of club.

I kinda get why Son has had his Red Card repealed, but what I don't get, is why Aurier isn't being punished instead. Horrendous, dangerous challenge, didn't touch the ball, and on a player who's already lost his balance die to the previous trip.

Also, I hope Sons yellow has been reinstated as well, because it was still a bookable offence, whether he's a sweetheart or not.

 

[PhilM]

I agree the refs are poor, and take your point a out switching Gomes with Son, but here's my answer, I would have been okay with that, if Son had got the same horrendous injury as Gomes, how could you moan ? Three game ban or a year out. But I'll tell you this, Everton would not have had the temerity to appeal it like Spurs have done, or I would hope not, crass and a lack of humility and respect, don't think we're that type of club.

That's the true galling part of this whole affair and what I suspect is causing the anger: whether they had the right to appeal or not, doing so was somewhat crass.

 

[davids]

I agree the refs are poor, and take your point a out switching Gomes with Son, but here's my answer, I would have been okay with that, if Son had got the same horrendous injury as Gomes, how could you moan ? Three game ban or a year out. But I'll tell you this, Everton would not have had the temerity to appeal it like Spurs have done, or I would hope not, crass and a lack of humility and respect, don't think we're that type of club.

It's going to get to the point when there is a referee in the changing room,and if a players goes off injured after any tackle VAR will come into play when the physios have checked him out.If people look at this logically,Son should have received a red even if Gomes got up and trotted away.It has to be about the tackle that decides the card not what the outcome is.

 

[davids]

I kinda get why Son has had his Red Card repealed, but what I don't get, is why Aurier isn't being punished instead. Horrendous, dangerous challenge, didn't touch the ball, and on a player who's already lost his balance die to the previous trip.

Also, I hope Sons yellow has been reinstated as well, because it was still a bookable offence, whether he's a sweetheart or not.

People are seeing Sons tackle as if it was an over the top studs up leg breaker,as you quite rightly point out Aurier did the real damage.

 

[Tipp blue]

Right but it's a pretty standard foul you see almost every match, if its deemed as reckless endangerment and thus a red card it should be a red card every time regardless of injury... not that I agree with that stance but that to me is the logical ruling you need to come to if you're going to enforce it.

It was not a standard foul, A standard foul does not involve getting angry and chasing a man down from 25 yards lunging in from behind with no intent of getting the ball. Obviously he didn't mean to cause the damage he did but I do believe he intended to get him.

 

[Connor]

 

[GwladysPhil]

He's off his head on pain killers there.

 

[Groucho]

Just pointing out mate that when I seen the 3 second video clip I couldn't see anything racist going on and he responded with "wow", "insane" implying that I should be seeing what he said he could see.

So I called him out on it that's all and he continued to chat crap about lack of evidence.

Agree

Not at all, though you have to take a contrary standpoint to disagree with something. Disagreement is what fuels discussion, which powers this forum.

Plenty of users agree with the points I make, plenty disagree. Both are equally fine with me, although there are times were others go beyond polite, respectful disagreement.

It doesn't particularly bother me, but If i'm getting Xhaka levels of abuse and getting pulled up on grammar, it's fair enough to give a bit back I'd say - as Mod i'll obviously take your direction on that?

There’s a debate and there’s being contrary for the sake of it though.

 

[DanEFC92]

He's off his head on pain killers there.

When I sprained my ankle I was in agony. Christ knows what his pain is like.

 

[marnie]

And on ignore you go KEIRAN You massive Beaut.I quite like this feature,it stops me getting banned for what I really want to FFIN say.

 

[bigboy]

Got pure morphine eyes going on there.