|
Lewes
Feb 27, 2010 9:21:30 GMT
Post by LeedsWCFC on Feb 27, 2010 9:21:30 GMT
|
|
|
Shares
Feb 5, 2010 17:40:04 GMT
Post by LeedsWCFC on Feb 5, 2010 17:40:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Jan 20, 2010 20:10:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Jan 18, 2010 22:38:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Jan 15, 2010 14:36:48 GMT
theyre asking for help on the website if saturdays game is called off Evesham United's match has been called off so volunteers are asked for to help out at Saint George's Lane from noon tomorrow. The main focus will be on the terraces and stands as the pitch should be okay so bring your spades and brooms along too if you can, please.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Jan 15, 2010 13:57:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Jan 15, 2010 9:01:15 GMT
Was Kemp on a contract or was he a non-contract player? Not sure it makes any difference does it? Maybe as to the potential for the club gettng a transfer fee for him? He was non-contract. I agree with what you say about The Bucks. I always greatly look forward to the games when City play them.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Jan 12, 2010 20:59:24 GMT
The problem is that the ref would never have said anything about elbows. The reason for sending off given would have been one of those stated in the laws of the game, and that isnt one of them. So the ref would have told the player that he was being sent off for "Serious Foul Play" or possibly "Violent Conduct" No other reason would need to be given, his report would read the same. The referee has no obligation to tell the player why he is being sent off but he would have to give details in his report of any incident which resulted in a sending-off. It is insufficient for the referee to merely cite the offence in law e.g. "I sent off Shabir Khan for violent conduct"; he has to give a brief account of the incident as is stated on the misconduct report form: "The incident which came under my notice was as follows:- (Note – The Report should be brief and to the point, relating only to the incident in question. If the report is for offensive, insulting or abusive language the actual language used MUST be reported.)"
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Jan 8, 2010 14:07:50 GMT
Or simply get one of the locally based Level 3 Referees in the County to do the pitch inspection instead like we have done in the past. It was the F.A. who decided who would carry out the inspection. The appointed person was Adam Watts who does live locally anyway. Bromsgrove?
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Jan 2, 2010 23:27:01 GMT
The Worcester News also says Rob Davies was booked but he wasn't. Right, so City ended the game with 11 men? Whats all the fuss about? Er, no they didn't.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Jan 2, 2010 20:47:06 GMT
The Worcester News also says Rob Davies was booked but he wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 29, 2009 13:39:01 GMT
and I'm fatter than all of you so I don't count. Not all!
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 27, 2009 16:55:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 27, 2009 14:31:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 20, 2009 19:51:57 GMT
And Marke Rawle selects Tom Kemp in his 'Dream Team'.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 19, 2009 10:07:54 GMT
Match postponed because of a frozen pitch.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 18, 2009 15:19:12 GMT
Pitch inspection at SGL tomorrow morning at 10am.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 18, 2009 10:36:48 GMT
Not all the yellow cards were for hard tackles. He unfortunately has to back chat to referees. Maybe not for 'hard' tackles but not for back chat either! From Steve Carley's live updates: 15th Aug v Woking: 51 mins: YELLOW CARD. City: Craig Wilding is booked for holding. 17th Aug v Basingstoke Town: 22 mins: YELLOW CARD. City: Wilding booked for a trip. 26th Sep v Bourne Town: 48 mins: YELLOW CARD. City: Wilding booked for challenge on Cartwright. 14th Nov v Dorchester Town: 66 mins: YELLOW CARD. City: Wilding booked. 15th Dec v Thurrock: 87 mins: YELLOW CARD. City: Wilding booked for foul on Paine.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 4, 2009 10:21:20 GMT
Worcester Referees' Society used to hold its meetings next door to the Joke Shop in The Oddfellows Club. Read into that what you will.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 3, 2009 19:30:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Dec 1, 2009 19:31:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Nov 19, 2009 18:24:12 GMT
Neither of them have been banned at all.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Nov 19, 2009 17:54:21 GMT
So who banned the Shedster? No-one. He has not been banned.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Nov 19, 2009 17:51:55 GMT
This is inaccurate - would anyone like it deleted? Actually its wholly accurate as one of my psuedonyms will confirm. the very same situation with someone abusing people without naughty language being allowed to get away with it, and then got banned for calling the person a t**t - once!! Another pseudonym pointed out the double standards of the moderators , got banned too. If you really want legal action, then fair enough, all rather silly but your suggestion. I'll dig out the screenshots. I recall maybe two instances when a newly registered poster to this board has opened with such a message as calling someone a t**t. As far as I'm concerned if someone registers on here and starts like that then there is good reason to delete the post. However, I never banned anyone in these instances. If these people then chose to not post again or delete to their own accounts then that was up to them and not my doing.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Nov 19, 2009 17:47:59 GMT
I wasn't going to get involved but I suggest that you read it again again. Take out the names of individuals who would just sign anything, kids, pseudo names and drunks the amount of names would equal the small majority of noisy wannabes! pseudo names = made up / pretend PS. I'm not in favour of banning anyone, especially someone who is so busy digging a hole big enough for us to fit our new stadium in, but I do think that you should perhaps reveal his identity to people who he genuinely insults (like Ealing), so that they can respond face to face. I'm fair game because I give and so am quite prepared to take, and also use my real name so that anyone who wants a discussion can do so at any home game. And while you are at it try to teach him that posting 3 or 4 small posts quickly in a row makes it difficult for anyone to respond directly, making them withdraw their post and not bothering to respond at all. Niels, his post does not say that you were responsible for adding "pseudo names" etc to the petition. He said they were there but not that you put them there. Your later explanation of how you later scrutinised the names before presenting the petition cleared up the points he made. I have no intention of revealing any users' details to anyone unless there are compelling reasons to do so. In any case, I don't know who mrpostive is. When registering on this banter board there is no requirement to give any personal details other than an e-mail address and that doesn't necessarily identify the person.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Nov 18, 2009 22:37:43 GMT
One example would be when he accused Niels of falsifying names on the "Boddy Out" petition. This was inaccurate, false and very definitely defamatory. Any more examples needed Kieran? I've just re-read the post in question and he made no such accusation.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Nov 18, 2009 3:05:39 GMT
mrpositive has persistently posted material that was false, defamatory, abusive and insulting about other people who use the forum. Please cite examples.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Nov 3, 2009 13:49:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Oct 30, 2009 21:37:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Oct 12, 2009 15:20:52 GMT
|
|