Elokobi

[ravenrover]

i_ateallthepies wrote:

Ok I know this will attract the ire of a few on here based on the Radio Dee Dah debate this week but did anyone hear Seth Benett's summing up of the game?

Something along the lines of 'and Elokobi was red carded when he seemed to make contact with James Coppinger whilst challenging for the ball'.

OK before anyone disputes the wording I only heard it the once as I was walking back to the car but the 'seemed to make contact with James Coppinger' is verbatim.  FFS! it happened right in front of the fcuking press box.

The line that creased me was along the lines \"Hunt runs up and scores, it's 2-2 this game is winnable\" for who, or was it just a Freudian slip?

[inSODwetrust]

Muttley wrote:

Steamed straight through Copps at full pelt from behind, maybe with a leading elbow.

No chance of playing the ball, deserved to go imo.

One of the few decisions the ref got right.

[/b]

Im glad someone else shares my view on that!

Yet again another awful set of officials at the Keepmoat!

[Joeking]

inSODwetrust wrote:


Yet again another awful set of officials at the Keepmoat![/quote]



I think I recognised the assistant on the West Stand side as Mr Rob Pollock, who refereed us very badly several times in the Conference. Perhaps Nathan can confirm?.

[Welling Rover]

According to the referees report from the Wolves site, the chalange was \"Reckless,late,at speed with excessive force likely to endanger the safety of the opponent \"
Can't argue with that !

[Filo]

Welling Rover wrote:

\"Reckless,late,at speed with excessive force likely to endanger the safety of the opponent \"
Can't argue with that !

Spot on!

[Mark DRFC]

after mccarthys comments too, they have decided not too appeal the sending off

[wolves27]

wolves have opted not to appeal in the end

we still dont reckon it's a red card offence, but then the likelyhood is the decision wont be overturned (generally takes a lot of conclusive evidence to get of the hook)

ref was a joke who got sucked in by the home support, wolves fans were laughing that you even was chanting \"off off\", imo he mistimed a header by about 1sec, went in full blooded and deserved a yellow card. but his eyes were always on the ball itself.

[Filo]

wolves27 wrote:

wolves have opted not to appeal in the end

we still dont reckon it's a red card offence, but then the likelyhood is the decision wont be overturned (generally takes a lot of conclusive evidence to get of the hook)

ref was a joke who got sucked in by the home support, wolves fans were laughing that you even was chanting \"off off\", imo he mistimed a header by about 1sec, went in full blooded and deserved a yellow card. but his eyes were always on the ball itself.

Read the refs report!

Reckless,late,at speed with excessive force likely to endanger the safety of the opponent

Which is exactly what you said in your post, he was endangering the safety of an opponent, and that was why he was sent off, you`ve admitted by saying that he deserved a yellow, that an offence was commited, in the refs opinion the ref considered that offence dangerous play and hence the red card!

[drfcsteve]

wolves27 wrote:

wolves have opted not to appeal in the end

we still dont reckon it's a red card offence, but then the likelyhood is the decision wont be overturned (generally takes a lot of conclusive evidence to get of the hook)

ref was a joke who got sucked in by the home support, wolves fans were laughing that you even was chanting \"off off\", imo he mistimed a header by about 1sec, went in full blooded and deserved a yellow card. but his eyes were always on the ball itself.

Yeah, it's a shame when there's conclusive video evidence of a player making a reckless challange from behind with no chance of winning the ball and leading with his arm. How are you ever supposed to effectively appeal!  

[wolves27]

his arm never hit the doncaster player by all accounts otherwise we'd have no arguement on the matter.

if you've played football you'd know if you ran 10m to win a header your going to be at full pelt and your arms always going to be elevated (unless you can nail the salmon-jump :-p )

he was literally 1sec late (if that) and if he had got there just before nothing would been said of it.

i could understand if he deliberatly took him out in being red

but his eyes were only ever on the ball

[BillyStubbsTears]

wolves27 wrote:

his arm never hit the doncaster player by all accounts otherwise we'd have no arguement on the matter.

if you've played football you'd know if you ran 10m to win a header your going to be at full pelt and your arms always going to be elevated (unless you can nail the salmon-jump :-p )

he was literally 1sec late (if that) and if he had got there just before nothing would been said of it.

i could understand if he deliberatly took him out in being red

but his eyes were only ever on the ball

Keep up spadger. We've been through this.

http://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=57&func=view&catid=999999&id=133214#133225

[Filo]

wolves27 wrote:

his arm never hit the doncaster player by all accounts otherwise we'd have no arguement on the matter.

if you've played football you'd know if you ran 10m to win a header your going to be at full pelt and your arms always going to be elevated (unless you can nail the salmon-jump :-p )

he was literally 1sec late (if that) and if he had got there just before nothing would been said of it.

i could understand if he deliberatly took him out in being red

but his eyes were only ever on the ball

So by you saying \"by all accounts\" you`re taking the word of the Wolves bench? unless, that is, you have got excellent vision and sightline from the North Stand on an incident that happened around the halfway line. I was considerably closer to the incident than you were and at no time did their heads clash, okicoki`s arm smashed into the side of Coppingers head, okicoki then went down holding his head feigning injury because he knew he was in trouble!