|
|
Post by greenpoleffc on Oct 7, 2007 23:35:36 GMT 10
Bring the game into disrepute charge perhaps. His very existence qualifies tbh
|
|
|
|
Post by Fish on Oct 7, 2007 23:48:12 GMT 10
How the f*** did the official not act when it happened.He must have balls of lead cause that would have felled many men lol
|
|
|
|
Post by omni on Oct 7, 2007 23:51:00 GMT 10
Stone faced, steps back and raises the flag, impressive.
Maybe that's why Breezy didn't red card couldn't understand the high pitched voice.
|
|
|
|
Post by thesandman on Oct 7, 2007 23:54:09 GMT 10
I hope that the FFA do have a means of dealing with it - but if they don't within the LOTG, then there isn't much they can do - if they try to do something illegal than I'm sure lawyers will get involved and it could get nasty. He really mustnt have connected with the referee too much - at least not in the intended region. Maybe the AR should thought like a player and hit the deck??  I do have to agree with greenpole's statements though!! |
|
|
|
Post by serious14 on Oct 8, 2007 3:37:17 GMT 10
One word for why Griffiths didn't get jack from his effort against Danny......
Karma. Plain and simple. Clock an assistant ref. in the balls and good luck getting a free kick for the next 20 years. Dickhead.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackadder on Oct 8, 2007 6:47:45 GMT 10
Haven't seen the incident, but if it is as reported manhandling a official in any way shape or form is not acceptable.
Anything less then 5 weeks is a disgrace.
If the FFA sweep this under the carpet, they are effectivly saying we support this behaviour. Better supply the linesmen with boxes that the batsmen use in Cricket.
|
|
|
|
Post by newieutd on Oct 8, 2007 8:17:09 GMT 10
Game highlights are on Fox Sports. Danny's a lucky boy. Seemed to me he made contact with his legs first. Strange thing is if the ref didn't think it was a foul, surely Griffiths should have got a second yellow for diving. That is what i was thinking. It either had to be a penalty or a second yellow for griffo. Terrible refereeing him in this instance and many others that night. I havent seen this punching incident but if what you guys say is true then lengthy suspension it should be. But the yellow card wipes that out |
|
|
|
Post by Ursus on Oct 8, 2007 8:42:08 GMT 10
Any sport.
Strike a referee - life ban.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andy on Oct 8, 2007 8:53:14 GMT 10
For those that haven't seen the incident, here it is. |
|
RECKY
Local league player
Posts: 120
|
Post by RECKY on Oct 8, 2007 9:00:13 GMT 10
thats a lifer aint it? it should be.
|
|
uncleyellow
Local league player
Yellow Yeah Yellow Yellow
Posts: 130
|
Post by uncleyellow on Oct 8, 2007 9:12:23 GMT 10
If the FFA dont step up ,just because an inadequate yellow was given, they are a joke. The little girl (griffiths) should be in front of a very pissed off panel for this one!!! If youre gonna hit him, not like that you girl...Not only was it incredibly illegal (in any code), but it was so incredibly girl-ish!!! You have no balls Griffiths, clearly, you are not a man....
|
|
|
|
Post by djebella on Oct 8, 2007 9:20:09 GMT 10
I think the only chance of any further sanction being taken against Griffiths will be if a post match report indicates he should be cited. Exactly like what happened to Musialik, who didn't even concede a free-kick let alone get a card at the time.
Having watch Danny's "tackle" on Griffiths on replay and slow mo. I have to say that IMHO Breeze made the correct decision, there was only contact because Griffiths had lost the ball and took the opportunity. I think the Danny's raised leg and Griifiths dive canceled each other out. It was very much like the Neill-Grosso incident in the world cup and people will argue black and blue each way just the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by brett on Oct 8, 2007 9:29:41 GMT 10
Should be banned for the rest of the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by newieutd on Oct 8, 2007 9:33:51 GMT 10
Having watch Danny's "tackle" on Griffiths on replay and slow mo. I have to say that IMHO Breeze made the correct decision, there was only contact because Griffiths had lost the ball and took the opportunity. I think the Danny's raised leg and Griifiths dive canceled each other out. It was very much like the Neill-Grosso incident in the world cup and people will argue black and blue each way just the same. IMO It doesnt work like that. No way does things cancel themselves out. Girffiths never lost the ball. He kicked it past Vukovic, knowing that Vukovic was commited to getting the ball and if he didnt get the ball then he was going to get the player, which is what happened. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Oct 8, 2007 9:36:03 GMT 10
Checked that YouTube vid. - very soft blow (the ref had baggy shorts on so not so sure it actually struck him), but the intensity of the blow or how girly-like the blow is given is not the issue. HE STRUCK A MATCH OFFICIAL.
That should have been a straight red, irrespective of the time it occurred in the match, how little discomfort or affront the Assistant Ref. felt. No ifs, no buts - and a lengthy suspension.
If the Assistant Ref had applied the Griffiths school of acting to that blow, the Police would have arrested the little sh*t.
|
|
|
|
Post by djebella on Oct 8, 2007 9:45:07 GMT 10
Having watch Danny's "tackle" on Griffiths on replay and slow mo. I have to say that IMHO Breeze made the correct decision, there was only contact because Griffiths had lost the ball and took the opportunity. I think the Danny's raised leg and Griifiths dive canceled each other out. It was very much like the Neill-Grosso incident in the world cup and people will argue black and blue each way just the same. IMO It doesnt work like that. No way does things cancel themselves out. Girffiths never lost the ball. He kicked it past Vukovic, knowing that Vukovic was commited to getting the ball and if he didnt get the ball then he was going to get the player, which is what happened. If Griffiths hadn't lost the ball he could have very, very easily stepped over Danny's leg and taken his time scoring as the goal would've been wide, wide open. |
|
|
|
Post by dibo (pron. "DIB-OH") on Oct 8, 2007 9:48:50 GMT 10
danny was late and made contact. simple as that. straight red.
griffiths made aggressive contact with an official. i don't think the fact that it was light really matters because it's not the assault itself but the intent and the gross disrespect for the official that is the problem.
should have been red, and that's only the start of the problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by newieutd on Oct 8, 2007 9:52:37 GMT 10
IMO It doesnt work like that. No way does things cancel themselves out. Girffiths never lost the ball. He kicked it past Vukovic, knowing that Vukovic was commited to getting the ball and if he didnt get the ball then he was going to get the player, which is what happened. If Griffiths hadn't lost the ball he could have very, very easily stepped over Danny's leg and taken his time scoring as the goal would've been wide, wide open. Are you saying that the severity of giving a free kick etc should be based on the person with the ball not the tackler??? Vukovic made a bad tackle, he got Griffo, no question. RED CARD. You cant start saying cant be a free kick because the person with the ball didnt do his uptmost to avoid the tackle. That is ridiculous. All this being said it was outside the box (so would have only been a free kick- but a red to Vukovic) and griffo shouldnt have been on the field |
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Oct 8, 2007 10:03:02 GMT 10
Are you saying that the severity of giving a free kick etc should be based on the person with the ball not the tackler??? Vukovic made a bad tackle, he got Griffo, no question. RED CARD. You cant start saying cant be a free kick because the person with the ball didnt do his uptmost to avoid the tackle. That is ridiculous. All this being said it was outside the box (so would have only been a free kick- but a red to Vukovic) and griffo shouldnt have been on the field Danny and Griffiths tackle was very late in the game - to be honest my first reaction to it was that Danny had missed the ball and hit Griffiths, and was about to be red carded. A definate one on one, last man in defence scenario. I get the feeling that if Boogs or Jedi had done it with Danny somehow out of the defence line, they would have been marched straight away. While refs are supposed to be fair at all times, you get the feeling that after so many falls and appeals for free kicks by Griffiths, that the man in the middle had had enough by then of him. Karma bit Griffiths I think. But yeah, Griffiths could have been marched at the 4 minute mark for the strike at the Assist. Ref. BTW, good to meet you yesterday and have a chat mate! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by T on Oct 8, 2007 10:12:48 GMT 10
I think Danny deserved a yellow, not a straight red as it looked as if he was going for the ball. That said, how many keepers are willing to slide tackle outside the box??
|
|
