Ballard

[BiG]

he's looking at the play and trying to grab the player around the collar, which is completely allowed in the game...

Eh?

 

[Daks]

OK then I'll play along.

Let's say it wasn't intent to grab his hair in the first instance. I think the movement of Ballards hand is to the hair, but anyway...

All the images show him still holding the lads hair when it's abundantly clear to Ballard both by distance from his shirt and by feel its is hair he has hold of, yet Ballard doesn't quickly release it. So even if there's no intent to grab it in the first place, the intent is still there to hold onto it and that's where its made it obvious to the camera as the distance between them has opened up.

It's not violent conduct. Are you thick ?

 

[Houghtoner]

Intent? Grabbed his hair ffs, topical issue with the same referee who sent Martinez off. Rank stupidity.

Would agree. We can debate whether the rule is correct or not all day long. But players have been sent off for that recently so he should’ve known better.

 

[bowers2]

It's not violent conduct. Are you thick ?

It is by the rules. You must be.

 

[Alfa]

Not a chance this gets downgraded. Blatant hair pull. Ballard should know better.

 

[flanny1]

It’s absolutely ridiculous. I don’t know what he is supposed to do, he isn’t looking and it’s completely accidental and only comes about from the opposition player having stupid hair.

 

[Super Colin Todd]

I've heard of stating the obvious!

 

[Oli Wagkz]

Not a chance this gets downgraded. Blatant hair pull. Ballard should know better.

I mean this with the greatest respect mate, you’re wrong.

The lad has hold of his shirt and catches a dreadlock. It’s a bollocks decision

 

[palm 1]

I mean this with the greatest respect mate, you’re wrong.

The lad has hold of his shirt and catches a dreadlock. It’s a bollocks decision

I think we should appeal. That’s a million miles away from what the rule was meant to represent.

 

[Daks]

It is by the rules. You must be.

Its not violent conduct. Show me the rule where jump for a ball and accidentally catch some rope.
Bet you can't. Thick heed

 

[splorty]

Its just another crap ruling that is turning the once beautiful game into a fcking farce

Aye. If there weren’t so many long haired ponces in the game…

 

[InsomniacAttack]

Surely we can appeal? Or if it's classed as violent conduct are we not allowed?

I think we would win.

 

[Dogbark]

Players shouldn't be able to wear their hair below shoulder length with this directive mind.

 

[splorty]

I think we should appeal. That’s a million miles away from what the rule was meant to represent.

Trouble is the fannies at the fa will reject it as they are trying to prove a point. If it robs a team of a key player and a few points then so be it. Wankers.

 

[Lo Ursem]

I hope we see him again in red and white shirt.

 

[palm 1]

Not a chance this gets downgraded. Blatant hair pull. Ballard should know better.

No it wasn’t . He is grappling with the player. , grabs the first thing he can get hold of and it happens to be his hair . It wasn’t even a booking for me .

 

[splorty]

Surely we can appeal? Or if it's classed as violent conduct are we not allowed?

I think we would win.

No way will it get overturned. It’s a hot topic.

 

[palm 1]

No way will it get overturned. It’s a hot topic.

I understand it to be a hot topic but there needs to be common sense applied . That incident is not why it was implemented.

 

[McGregor]

Just seen the photo still of the pull one strand of hair because he was holding onto the shirt. The game is absolutely fucked

 

[abbs]

If you think Ballard intentionally pulls his hair.
If you think he deserves a red card.
And if you think either way it’s a sending off, then you can lick my hoop.

It’s absolutely shite. Nowt in it, shit decision and a 7 foot shithouse wants shooting for screaming because one of his dreadlocks accidentally got tugged.

Get fucked.

agree with all of this