Re: Ryan Atkins : Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:08 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

he's banged Channelle which can't be a bad thing.

Offside Monkey wrote:

I've always found him impressive physically but dissapoiting technically. How old is he now?

I think this was Chanelle's assessment as well.

Even if he didn't know the lad was injured it was one of those cheap and cynical aggressive flops that should be outlawed.

Re: Ryan Atkins : Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:18 pm  

BigRedV wrote:

I think this was Chanelle's assessment as well.

Even if he didn't know the lad was injured it was one of those cheap and cynical aggressive flops that should be outlawed.

You can't out law it, because it wasn't technically wrong. You can't create a rule that says "don't tackle people when they're injured".

Atkins should've just known better although we'll never know if he genuinely didn't realise. Let's not get hung up on it, though.

Re: Ryan Atkins : Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:25 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

You can't out law it, because it wasn't technically wrong.

For real? If you outlaw something you make it technically wrong. That is how rule-making works.

If the ball carrier is on the floor and not moving, don't power slam him like you are a WWF wrestler. A good rule I think. You can stop him from moving (i.e. complete the tackle) without trying to hurt him.

: Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:41 pm  

Saint Michael wrote:

I wonder why this thread has upset more Leeds fans than it has Wakey?

Pardon?

Two of us have posted on it. I made a tongue in cheek comment and DoubleAone has made some more in depth comments.

Do you have a complex about Leeds?

Re: Ryan Atkins : Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:45 pm  

BigRedV wrote:

For real? If you outlaw something you make it technically wrong. That is how rule-making works.

Sorry, I didn't write that very well.

What I meant is that Aktins didn't do anything wrong within the rules of the game, only in the spirit of the game, which is not really something you can legislate for - you just have to rely on honour amongst players. You'll get the odd incident like t'other night, but on the whole, mutual respect between players will govern it well enough.

: Mon Mar 30, 2009 6:29 pm  

G1 wrote:

Pardon?

Two of us have posted on it. I made a tongue in cheek comment and DoubleAone has made some more in depth comments.

Do you have a complex about Leeds?

Oh, tongue in cheek. Ok.

DoubleAone, demanded to know why I had included Bailey when it was perfectly obvious why I had mentioned him and even included a clue in the OP.

And to your last point, I assume that was tongue in cheek, I can never tell.

: Mon Mar 30, 2009 6:56 pm  

Saint Michael wrote:

DoubleAone, demanded to know why I had included Bailey when it was perfectly obvious why I had mentioned him and even included a clue in the OP.

Demanded ??? you see thats the problem from my point of view.

You take an "extreme" position on things when its just not called for.

Atkins flopped on the ball carrier and I for one would give him the benefit of the doubt.

In my direct experience players neither give nor expect favours and generally what goes around comes around.

Players dont moan or bitch about these things..Wellens included to his cedit..and they just get up and get on with things.

Like a famous player once said there is no where to hide on a RL pitch....

: Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:49 pm  

DoubleAone wrote:

Demanded ??? you see thats the problem from my point of view.

You take an "extreme" position on things when its just not called for.

Atkins flopped on the ball carrier and I for one would give him the benefit of the doubt.

In my direct experience players neither give nor expect favours and generally what goes around comes around.

Players dont moan or bitch about these things..Wellens included to his cedit..and they just get up and get on with things.

Like a famous player once said there is no where to hide on a RL pitch....

It appeared that you took offence to Bailey being mentioned when it was relevant to the thread, you also mentioned the post being sad and boring but yet you keep coming back....

Atkins flopped on the ball carrier who was clearly injured and had no one been near him the ref would have called time of for an injury.

: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:11 pm  

It was nothing and should be forgotten.

Technically there was nothing wrong with it but would we really want our refs making calls on "unnecessary roughness" anyway?

: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:51 pm  

Saint Michael wrote:

It appeared that you took offence to Bailey being mentioned when it was relevant to the thread, you also mentioned the post being sad and boring but yet you keep coming back....

Atkins flopped on the ball carrier who was clearly injured and had no one been near him the ref would have called time of for an injury.

or one of his team mates could have taken the ball from Wheeler and it was play on.

Atkins played to the whistle because clearly the ref HADNT realised Wheeler was injured.

When did so much whinging and moaning become infested in the RL game

PS

No offence taken I just dont see the relevance of bringing Bailey into the discussion. Your posts are boring IMHO but the thread is quiet interesting...or at least it was.