It was a hard, aggressive tackle and doesn't warrant the attention it is being given. Hodgson used it as an excuse to draw attention away from his player cheating for the penalty and we've bought into it.
Quote from: Chris Smith on October 23, 2011, 07:47:06 AMIt was a hard, aggressive tackle and doesn't warrant the attention it is being given. Hodgson used it as an excuse to draw attention away from his player cheating for the penalty and we've bought into it.I don't think Hutton has been great for us, but I think the game has gone soft in that it has effectively outlawed hard tackling. Stuart Pearce used to do this sort of thing every week. To my mind it is a part of the game that bought excitement and adrenalin on and off the pitch.
Give me a full back that takes the ball and the player and puts them both in row z if required.
Quote from: Fasth56 on October 24, 2011, 05:53:34 PMGive me a full back that takes the ball and the player and puts them both in row z if required. And if both our full backs take the same view then we'll be playing most games with nine men.He looks like he's auditioning for Street Fighter 2. It's awful.
Quote from: Dave on October 24, 2011, 06:02:49 PMQuote from: Fasth56 on October 24, 2011, 05:53:34 PMGive me a full back that takes the ball and the player and puts them both in row z if required. And if both our full backs take the same view then we'll be playing most games with nine men.He looks like he's auditioning for Street Fighter 2. It's awful.Never played in the Birmingham works league then Dave?
Ouch!
Sure it's about interpretation and there is a human element. But as the saying goes, to err is human. If we remove the claret and blue goggle effect, I wonder how many independent reporters, observers and pundits have come out and said they thought the ref judged that one correctly. I can't say I've seen or heard any yet.