Justanordinaryfan wrote:

Justanordinaryfan wrote:Did he officially sanction the kid ?

???

???

Justanordinaryfan wrote:

Justanordinaryfan wrote:

Justanordinaryfan wrote:Did he officially sanction the kid ?

???

???

Yes. By playing the extra minutes, far longer than the blond kid used up, he ensured that the blond kid got some really dirty looks, I suspect some unpleasant jibes and had a thoroughly miserable journey back to Newport.

I'd say that was a sanction, wouldn't you?

Edit.

A little tip. When asked a really stupid question by someone trying to be clever ignore it. Most intelligent people will get your point. However if your adversary is determined to mindlessly attack you they will do you the favour of asking the really stupid question a second time.

When they so that, crush them without mercy. They asked for it.

No I wouldn’t . Did the ref officially say “we are playing on til Ebbsfleet score ?”.

Well, of course, the official wording when announced or put on the display board is........ A minimum of *** minutes. I expect that's what happened and in this trivial counter argument you don't actually know how much extra extra time was added in that match at least eight seasons ago.

Justanordinaryfan wrote:No I wouldn’t . Did the ref officially say “we are playing on til Ebbsfleet score ?”.

No.

But he played far longer than was the delay caused by Blondie.

As was pointed out by many on this board at the time.

Tell me, has anyone ever told you that you are a sucker for punishment?

Now now don’t get personal and abusive .... I just don’t agree with you that’s all.

excessbee wrote:Well, of course, the official wording when announced or put on the display board is........ A minimum of *** minutes. I expect that's what happened and in this trivial counter argument you don't actually know how much extra extra time was added in that match at least eight seasons ago.

I don't comment on things I don't see. I suggest if you don't want to carry on making yourself look foolish,
you follow my example.

To be clear, the referee clearly added on far more time than was wasted.

Also back then at Conference level there was no official announcement of time added on. But I guess you had to be there.

Justanordinaryfan wrote:Now now don’t get personal and abusive .... I just don’t agree with you that’s all.

No you were trying to be clever. And you know you were.

Back on topic.

Plymouth cheated. All clubs cheat. If the cheating was obvious then the complaint we have should not be with Plymouth but with the referee.

Three statements. With which do you disagree?

Positives from yesterday.We created chances throughout and actually looked like scoring,this hasn't been the case many games this year.Green was dangerous every time he had the ball and he was left up when we defended corners.This gives us an outlet and takes one of theirs out of our area,reducing their chance of scoring.Sheehan was on the ball passing and we looked better for it.They were hanging on at the end and brought everyone back,fans and players celebrated as if they'd won the league not just beating little old Newport.Something to build on but,still some negatives.Still lumping it in the general direction of Matt,why,if he wins it there is no one near him to play off.Time to try something else.Willmott playing anywhere bar his best position,if Green can play on the left,do it or,put Willmott on the bench.Why take Podge off,he is the one instinctive player in the box,baffled by that.However,disappointed to lose and not dejected like some games.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Justanordinaryfan wrote:Now now don’t get personal and abusive .... I just don’t agree with you that’s all.

No you were trying to be clever. And you know you were.

Back on topic.

Plymouth cheated. All clubs cheat. If the cheating was obvious then the complaint we have should not be with Plymouth but with the referee.

Three statements. With which do you disagree?

No I wasn’t trying to be clever.

Won’t bother answering cos when I don’t agree you get all pissy pants.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

excessbee wrote:Well, of course, the official wording when announced or put on the display board is........ A minimum of *** minutes. I expect that's what happened and in this trivial counter argument you don't actually know how much extra extra time was added in that match at least eight seasons ago.

I don't comment on things I don't see. I suggest if you don't want to carry on making yourself look foolish,
you follow my example.

To be clear, the referee clearly added on far more time than was wasted.

Also back then at Conference level there was no official announcement of time added on. But I guess you had to be there.

Hang on a minute. You've joined in a discussion about an incident that happened in yesterday's match and now say "I don't comment on things I don't see". Going back to Ebbsfleet, just because it is your opinion, doesn't make it a fact.

Looking at how Argyle celebrated at the end you could see what a battle they had.

I didn't see exactly what this ball boy did as I wasn't there. 

Exactly so why are you keeping on about it

I don't comment on things I don't see. 

You didn't see yesterday's match or the ball boy escapade

excessbee wrote:
Hang on a minute. You've joined in a discussion about an incident that happened in yesterday's match and now say "I don't comment on things I don't see". Going back to Ebbsfleet, just because it is your opinion, doesn't make it a fact.

Read my post on page 4.

I said I didn't see the incident but if the accounts are correct then our gripe is with the referee. Note the word if. Ponder, reflect and if you have anything about you apologise.

I stand by that. My disagreement with you and Justanordinaryfan is that you appear to be setting yourself up as arbiters of what cheating should be allowed and what shouldn't. My view is every team tries to gain every advantage they can. That includes Newport County. For me as we engage in the dark arts for us to then complain when others do is sour grapes.

You are right about one thing, it is only my opinion that the inordinately long period of overtime at Ebbsfleet was as a result of the referee adding more time than was lost.