Of course, West Brom owed us one after Craig Dawson's gbh assault on Jules in October 2014. Any fair or competent ref would have sent Dawson off, VAR or no VAR, but the ref that day was none other than the notorious Mark Cl#nterburg, who not only failed to give a foul against Dawson but even allowed West Brom's consequent goal. I was appalled to see that the late Clattenf*ck made a return on Saturday, as the go-to ref for comments in the Liverpool Wolves tv broadcast. He was as up himself as ever, and was clearly hankering for the days when he could laugh and chat with Ferguson in the tunnel before the Palace/Man U cup final.

The right place at the right time

One can get into protracted debate on the issue of "Intent" in relation to fouls.
Not every incident viewed as a foul or indeed worthy of a caution has an element of "Intent".
There might of course be intent but decisions are based on the Law.

Anyway, such exchanges of views on the 'Intent' element of fouls do not serve to keep this thread on-track and could evolve into yet another dastardly WILLO thread!

Edited by Willo (07 Dec 2020 3.11pm)

What Souness was saying was that the goals weren't hard enough to score. And if I were a west brom fan, I would agree. It's not a criticism of us.

If you want to live in a world full of kindness, respect and love, try to show these qualities.

Basically they said, by the letter of the law it was a red but the law is wrong and refs should use common sense. Refs and common sense don’t always go together.
Wright said PVA was not hurt as he played on but you could here him scream! I didn’t and how does he know he was not hurt, fair play to PVA for not rolling around.
Some West Brom fans said he deserved it as is known to show a petulant side

Canterbury Eagle - Thank you for your response.

Suffice to say I am not in the same page as Wright and Jenas.