BFTG Burton

[If you still hate Futcher]

Are any of these comments on the foul based on anyone actually seeing the incident, either live or on replays?

I ask because, if there's some footage of it, I would like to see it myself as it was at the other end and I was following the line of the ball. All I saw was the forward, who was nowhere near getting to the ball, fall over and Edwards fall over him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fosN_Bir52Q
6 minutes 42 in. Not only a decent angle of the incident but you can also pretty well work out what the referee sees. No real complaints.

Thanks Cube, so it was very clumsy and it looks like an ankle tap as they were running in but very minimal contact - I hope that's why he went over and not for the arm on his shoulder. I'm not really sure what Edwards was trying to do and he gave the forward the excuse he was looking for once he knew he wasn't getting anywhere near the ball. But if it had been the other way round and with that view I would've understood if it hadn't been given.


Moving on, I'm surprised no-one's mentioned our mate Steve. Good bit of interaction between him and us for the 2nd half and fair play to him for acknowledging us at the end

[Brum Royal]

Steeeeeeeeeeve!

Joined in with it to be fair. Enjoyed that!

[Denver Royal]

At the time, to me there was contact and it was one of those where it was a foul, and certainly would have been given anywhere else in the park. But, since it was inside the box, and the award more penal, was it 'worthy' of a pen? Of course, a foul is a foul is a foul, and all that. But, I think (I say, I think?) they allow refs discretion and leeway these days re. pens? Quite how much, or if any(?), I'm unsure of. Maybe some refs in here could weigh in? Anyway, it was a shame cos reckon we would have had shutout there, but not too many complaints it was given, really.

[marlowuk]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fosN_Bir52Q
6 minutes 42 in. Not only a decent angle of the incident but you can also pretty well work out what the referee sees. No real complaints.

I agree. And that link you shared was a fair and honest assessment of the game from a youngster.

[Maneki Neko]

At the time, to me there was contact and it was one of those where it was a foul, and certainly would have been given anywhere else in the park. But, since it was inside the box, and the award more penal, was it 'worthy' of a pen? Of course, a foul is a foul is a foul, and all that. But, I think (I say, I think?) they allow refs discretion and leeway these days re. pens? Quite how much, or if any(?), I'm unsure of. Maybe some refs in here could weigh in? Anyway, it was a shame cos reckon we would have had shutout there, but not too many complaints it was given, really.

say no to stream of consciousness writing!

[genome]

penal

lol

[Maneki Neko]

[John Smith]

At the time, to me there was contact and it was one of those where it was a foul, and certainly would have been given anywhere else in the park. But, since it was inside the box, and the award more penal, was it 'worthy' of a pen? Of course, a foul is a foul is a foul, and all that. But, I think (I say, I think?) they allow refs discretion and leeway these days re. pens? Quite how much, or if any(?), I'm unsure of. Maybe some refs in here could weigh in? Anyway, it was a shame cos reckon we would have had shutout there, but not too many complaints it was given, really.

You haven't really made a point here amongst 6 lines of waffle.

Pro refs don't come on this forum.

[LUX]

say no to stream of consciousness writing!

well, we certainly cannot accuse you of that

[Maneki Neko]

wahey!

[Snowflake Royal]

At the time, to me there was contact and it was one of those where it was a foul, and certainly would have been given anywhere else in the park. But, since it was inside the box, and the award more penal, was it 'worthy' of a pen? Of course, a foul is a foul is a foul, and all that. But, I think (I say, I think?) they allow refs discretion and leeway these days re. pens? Quite how much, or if any(?), I'm unsure of. Maybe some refs in here could weigh in? Anyway, it was a shame cos reckon we would have had shutout there, but not too many complaints it was given, really.

You haven't really made a point here amongst 6 lines of waffle.

Pro refs don't come on this forum.

PaultheRoyal might disagree with you.

[LWJ]

At the time, to me there was contact and it was one of those where it was a foul, and certainly would have been given anywhere else in the park. But, since it was inside the box, and the award more penal, was it 'worthy' of a pen? Of course, a foul is a foul is a foul, and all that. But, I think (I say, I think?) they allow refs discretion and leeway these days re. pens? Quite how much, or if any(?), I'm unsure of. Maybe some refs in here could weigh in? Anyway, it was a shame cos reckon we would have had shutout there, but not too many complaints it was given, really.

You haven't really made a point here amongst 6 lines of waffle.

Pro refs don't come on this forum.

PaultheRoyal might disagree with you.

Yup was going to add that - also a qualified ref here. Though not to anywhere near the standard PTR was at. (yet)

[Snowflake Royal]

You haven't really made a point here amongst 6 lines of waffle.

Pro refs don't come on this forum.

PaultheRoyal might disagree with you.

Yup was going to add that - also a qualified ref here. Though not to anywhere near the standard PTR was at. (yet)

Good for you LWJ!

You actively refing regularly?