Shodwall cat

Nothing wrong with a good debate about football we all have different opinions or it would be pretty boring. Bit different from asking for information regarding our youth players though. I'm sure bainsford can make up his own mind on whether he wants to reply or not.

Cheers. Good to know that. They seem to all be doing pretty well. If they aren't quite ready probs a loan deal at a higher level the next step. Would be great to see homegrown players back in the side in the future.

What a load of pish.

What's the situation with the current apprentices? They will return from their loans this summer but how long does the apprenticeship last for? I presume there is a time when a final decision has to be made regarding signing them for going forward.

He'd have been better from his point of view simply clattering into bavidge and clearing him out with his body. Probably a yellow card at worse. He doesn't come over as that type of player though. If there's a ball to be won he'd rather do that but his decision to play the ball rather than the man unfortunately cost him on this occasion.

Exactly. I don't think for a minute that coll knew he was endangeting his opponent by making that challenge. It was a split second misjudgement which unfortunately cost him dearly.

I would like to think though that Coll had no idea that he was endangering an opponent when he went in for that challenge. He certainly doesn't come across as that sort of player. His disciplinary record this season has been exemplary.

I officiate regularly and follow the laws to the letter doesn't mean I agree with them all. I'd have sent Coll off but I'd have felt incredibly harsh doing it. I mean some of the examples of red cards these days are hard to agree with. A player is running with the ball for instance . Another player tackles him sliding in from the side. The player with the ball in controlling it whilst running forwards foot bounces off the ball and on to the tacklers foot on the deck. Thats given as an example of a red card to be given against the player running with the ball. It's crazy as it's completely unintentional and the player with the ball has no idea that his foot is going to bounce off the ball on to the player on the deck. It's nonsense.

The vast majority of fouls in every match at any level of football are caused by players making the wrong split second decisions during a match. I can nick that ball away, I can get to that ball without getting the man and so on.Doesn't matter what level you are playing at players simply cannot with the pace of the game get every decision they make right. Quite rightly the deliberate leg breaker foul has just about been eradicated from the game but we are still seeing more red cards now than ever before at the very top level of the game. despite your claim that players are far better at making decisions than ever before.I'm all for red cards for the really bad tackles but I also want to try and keep 11 men on the park .

I can only presume that you have never ever played football at any competitive level if you think that. Bavidge didn't have the ball. If he had the ball it would be a completely different scenario he is running towards the ball coll is running towards the ball. Coll kicks the ball cleanly over the head of bavidge and then collides with bavidge. Neither player is expecting to collide with the other one or it would never have happened.

Split seconds again your eyes on the ball you don't have time to think through every scenario. These things happen in the blink of an eye. I'm sure if bavidge had had loads of time to think about it he wouldn't have kept running and instead would've stopped before he got anywhere near Coll.

As I keep saying players in the vast majority of cases don't have time to think twice and football is all about instinct. You appear to think that when playing top level football players are going to be able to stop have a wee think and then way up the decision on whether to make a tackle or not. It just doesn't work that way. The real bad deliberate leg break tackles are obvious because they are the ones that occur when a player actually does have time to think about it. It's a predetermined act not a split second occurrence. The high feet issue was never a major problem in the game though . Very few times did you ever see it happening before and now the only difference is that the very few times it occurs we are red carding and ruining games .

It does. Violent conduct is a 3 game ban but you can't get sent off for violent conduct if you are making a tackle.

Exactly it's easy to see whether a player is deliberately trying to hurt a player or not. Yesterday noone thought it was at all deliberate including the kelty players and bavidge. If you've at all played the game you know when someone is trying to do you or just making an honest attempt to get the ball

As you say that red card yesterday isn't going to prevent that happening again as it's a complete accident so why are we sending people off for it? Again people seem to think that in a game as fast and physical as football players have time to think whole complete situations through before making instinctive decisions. It's impossible.The same thing will happen again in the same situation whether a red card is given or not because it wasn't deliberate. It's like high feet . Used to just be an indirect free kick now people are getting sent off for it. There was never a plethora of high feet occurrences before it suddenly became a red card so why suddenly make it a sending off offence when it's a complete accident. When I played football I got injured due to accidents but I never wanted or asked for the player to be red carded. These things happen it's football. The real bad tackles are never instinctive they are pre planned and intentional and easy to ban from the game. You don't need to send people off for accidents to get rid of leg breaking challenges.