• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Ballard


EternallySAFC said:
You would have to be an idiot to think he could easily stop himself from doing what he has trained himself to do for years just because the interpretation of a rule has suddenly changed. You called him a beast and part of that is down to him grappling with attackers and coming out on top.

Let's hope they change the interpretation back again.
Click to expand...
He’s hairs that long and Ballard is watching the ball he’d have to take his eye off the ball to look where to place has hands as not to grab hair. It’s mental and like I posted yesterday if hair it that long it shouldn’t be over the uniform. There needs to be some either common sense or more laws that stop players having huge hair over the top of their shirts. We see outfield players wearing leggings man it needs to be rained in.
 
Roker Mackem said:
It must have been happening lots before now but its suddenly trendy to punish it
Click to expand...
Last one pre the recent shite was last year. The problem with Ballard's was that is was sustained and you can clearly see the force of the pull. As I said, shit happens and it's a pisser that it probably cost us 2 points.

You must be logged on to see media items

Though looking for that one, I saw this one from a few days ago

You must be logged on to see media items
 
Mackemansj1 said:
He’s hairs that long and Ballard is watching the ball he’d have to take his eye off the ball to look where to place has hands as not to grab hair. It’s mental and like I posted yesterday if hair it that long it shouldn’t be over the uniform. There needs to be some either common sense or more laws that stop players having huge hair over the top of their shirts. We see outfield players wearing leggings man it needs to be rained in.
Click to expand...
Haway man, it's not even near the name at the top of his shirt and do you really think Ballard can't see where his head is, therefore his hair, given the position of the 2 players?

There's no denying the rule is shite and it shouldn't be a red but it's clear Ballard pull his hair and it's not just a glancing tug. Given his hair length then the claims of grabbing a shirt but catching his hair argument is a bit weak IMO. As I said, if this was the other way around Traore's hair getting ragged but it wasn't a red, I doubt the shirt pulling defence would be a loud as it is now.


This is his hair pre kick off.

Logon or register to see this image



Does Ballard really not know he's got a handful of hair?

Logon or register to see this image




The hair looks longer here simply because it's pulling his head back also.



Also looking at the laws of the game and the 2nd part of it regarding the head and face. I suppose this is where hair comes into it and again the sustained holding and force of Ballard's pull isn't negligble. It's not to be take literally as "violent conduct" as in punching a player in the face as we've seen reds simply fior raised hands to a face and this is along those lines I suppose.

VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
 
Last edited:
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK said:
Haway man, it's not even near the name at the top of his shirt and do you really think Ballard can't see where his head is, therefore his hair, given the position of the 2 players?

There's no denying the rule is shite and it shouldn't be a red but it's clear Ballard pull his hair and it's not just a glancing tug. Given his hair length then the claims of grabbing a shirt but catching his hair argument is a bit weak IMO. As I said, if this was the other way around Traore's hair getting ragged but it wasn't a red, I doubt the shirt pulling defence would be a loud as it is now.


This is his hair pre kick off.

Logon or register to see this image



Does Ballard really not know he's got a handful of hair?

Logon or register to see this image




The hair looks longer here simply because it's pulling his head back also.



Also looking at the laws of the game and the 2nd part of it regarding the head and face. I suppose this is where hair comes into it and again the sustained holding and force of Ballard's pull isn't negligble. It's not to be take literally as "violent conduct" as in punching a player in the face as we've seen reds simply fior raised hands to a face and this is along those lines I suppose.

VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
Click to expand...

So not in the rules then. Making stuff up as they go along
 
As he’s bending like that his hair is clearly covering his name, Ballard clearly never takes his eyes off the ball you think in a premier league game at full speed with a lad weighing 14 stone of muscle 6ft plus you can afford split seconds to see where a players hair is landing 😂 he’d be absolutely dragged over the Cole’s if he gave away a goal because he took his eye off the ball to see where his oppent hair was 😂😂
 
Mackemansj1 said:
As he’s bending like that his hair is clearly covering his name, Ballard clearly never takes his eyes off the ball you think in a premier league game at full speed with a lad weighing 14 stone of muscle 6ft plus you can afford split seconds to see where a players hair is landing 😂 he’d be absolutely dragged over the Cole’s if he gave away a goal because he took his eye off the ball to see where his oppent hair was 😂😂
Click to expand...

This
 
Roker Mackem said:
So not in the rules then. Making stuff up as they go along
Click to expand...
Hair pulling has been a red ages so how are they making it up? 🤣 Did you see my comment at the end about the 2nd part of the law regarding head and face? This is where the hair will come into it and it's clear the force of Ballard's pull wasn't negligible.

VIOLENT CONDUCT
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
 
RedandWhiteRebel said:
Two pyshical players up against each other. Ballard is looking to grab the man not the hair.

Ridiculous decision which cost us 3 points.
Click to expand...
You can see where Ballard has hold it’s where he’d be pulling at the shirt. So either we rule football a non grabbing sport and the game is stopped every two seconds when an opponent grabs the others shirt or we use a bit of common sense here and either stop with long hair and f***ing leggings etc for outfield players or call it a foul and give a free kick. Just like a hard tackle and a foul there’s common sense that needs to be in play here that refs and football seem to have tossed out the window lately.
 
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK said:
Hair pulling has been a red ages so how are they making it up? 🤣 Did you see my comment at the end about the 2nd part of the law regarding head and face? This is where the hair will come into it and it's clear the force of Ballard's pull wasn't negligible.

VIOLENT CONDUCT
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
Click to expand...

Strikes. That suggests a hit. No mention of hair.

Obviously they are going to give a red for a blatant pull but nothing about the subjective ones like Ballards
 
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK said:
Hair pulling has been a red ages so how are they making it up? 🤣 Did you see my comment at the end about the 2nd part of the law regarding head and face? This is where the hair will come into it and it's clear the force of Ballard's pull wasn't negligible.

VIOLENT CONDUCT
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
Click to expand...
Has there been a spate of hair pulling before this season I’m struggling to remember many reds for it in the top flight. There is clearly a massive difference between this and the ones we’ve seen lately to just grabbing a players hair blatantly.
 
Mackemansj1 said:
You can see where Ballard has hold it’s where he’d be pulling at the shirt. So either we rule football a non grabbing sport and the game is stopped every two seconds when an opponent grabs the others shirt or we use a bit of common sense here and either stop with long hair and f***ing leggings etc for outfield players or call it a foul and give a free kick. Just like a hard tackle and a foul there’s common sense that needs to be in play here that refs and football seem to have tossed out the window lately.
Click to expand...

Yep its bad enough it cost us 3 points yesterday but now Ballard is banned for 3 games for violent conduct.

Absolute joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top