What happened to Flannagan's appeal?

MSF

Well-Known Member
#5
Thing is it shouldn’t be overturned. Its a red card. But precedent has been set because of Brown, Simunovic & Bachmann.
 

gmacdon76

Well-Known Member
#23
Bachman's was an elbow to the face yet was rescinded. Flanagan was not an elbow and not to the face. Even though the turncoat rat held his ugly pus after contact.
This 100%. It was a forearm to the chest but by the end of the game it was being spoken of as an elbow to the face which is what then gets repeated *everywhere*.
 

RFC417

Well-Known Member
#34
Ye of little faith, she got herself stuck in a corner due to the Taig player not being dealt with properly and had no choice but to uphold the appeal
Flanagan was not an elbow and not to the face, nothing to do with Sumo's assault being ignored.

The ref got it right and Brown made the panel decision easy by going down holding his ugly pus after a forearm shove in the chest.
 

Barca Bear

Well-Known Member
#36
Bachman's was an elbow to the face yet was rescinded. Flanagan was not an elbow and not to the face. Even though the turncoat rat held his ugly pus after contact.
Listen to walkers commentary, he says Flanagan catches brown in the neck, then as Browns hands go up, he changes it to face.
 

Barca Bear

Well-Known Member
#37
There's something worrying about this.
Forget if you can any vendetta against us as this applies to the killie goalie as well.
Co thinks it should be looked at.
This season all three must agree on decision.
All three agree it's a red.
On appeal, all three say it's not.
If anything needs looking into, it's a system that the above can happen.
 

gersfanal

Well-Known Member
#38
Perhaps the review should have also resulted in a retrospective ban/card at least, for Broony, for simulation.
Maybe that's being a bit optimistic !
 
Top