Jump to content

Serial Whingers Notts Forest playtime, which we simply cannot accept.


REDCAR

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Crewton said:

I've just seen the three incidents on motd2. My take would be:

- first one, tap on the heel, ridiculous dive, no penalty.

- second one, ball strikes defenders arm from a yard away, arm in a natural position, seen em given, but not a penalty IMO.

- third one, yep, didn't get the ball, 100% penalty 😂

You saw it exactly the same as me.

1 and 2 are sometimes given but shouldnt be.

Number 3 looked stonewall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Is this to influence their appeal this week? 

Personally I think they shouldn’t turn up for their next league game just like Middlesbrough didn’t a good few years ago 😉

To be fair, their players haven't turned up for 90% of the games this season, so 1 more shouldn't do any harm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

That statement is also liable if Atwell wants to take it to court and fill his pension pot 

Exactly.

I'm also puzzled by the post coming on the official club account - strikes me as the individual with that opinion didn't feel brave enough to put their name to it, because it's evidently a ludicrous statement for notts forest to make as a club. Either that or the plan is to fire the social media person and throw them under the bus if it blows up in their face.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, simmoram1995 said:

An attempt to distance themselves from the suggestion that corruption is at play, whilst maintaining no official should be a rival fan.

Feels like the backtracking has begun following the shitstorm it’s created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, JfR said:

Nabbed this from the Everton forum:
image.thumb.png.a9dafbd1eb1548857b37bfbb0ca11a59.png

Ludicrious the Mail doesn't say Clatters is paid by Forest. Less dire news sources usually say when the writer is under the pay of the organisation they are defending.

Some of the morons who read the Mail will now be thinking "that independent and unbiased former ref and Gladiators dork Clatternberg thinks Forest has been unfairly treated, so maybe that joke statement the club put out is ok". Makes a change about worrying about small boats. Wonder what Clatters thinks about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

You saw it exactly the same as me.

1 and 2 are sometimes given but shouldnt be.

Number 3 looked stonewall.

Exactly how I saw them too.

1 and 2 definitely get filed under 'seen them given'. But would I kick up a massive fuss if Derby weren't given them? Probably not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Scott129 said:

Exactly how I saw them too.

1 and 2 definitely get filed under 'seen them given'. But would I kick up a massive fuss if Derby weren't given them? Probably not.

1 was a whopping dive. 2 is one of those where you have seen it given, but I don't believe it should be. He's like a yard away from it. As for the comparison with Coventry yesterday, there was a greater distance. The third one is the real one I'd be annoyed about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...