I'm sorry PD, but.................

[aidanstu]

Okay maybe the forest jibe was cheap. I know CoppsI is well respected amongst the fans but I havn't rated him for a good few seasons. He doesn't do half of what you would want from an attacking midfielder. His skills currently are maybe more like you would look for in a holding central midfielder brought on with 390 minutes left. CoppsI is no longer championship quality which is why Forrest never played him and h can't hold down a regular starting place.

That's not to say I'm ungrateful for what he has achieved at the rovers previously.

[Bentley Bullet]

BB. I am not interested in whether referees occasionally don't give a penalty because a player stays on his feet. It's one of those things. As I say, the instances will cancel out over time. So it doesn't matter.

When instances do occur, it's frustrating and it would be better if they didn't. But that is a far lesser problem than accepting the alternative, which is widespread cheating.

No excuses for diving. No justification for diving. If we just condemn it unreservedly, there'll be more chance of it being stamped out. If we justify it, as you are doing, players will continue to cheat.

I am not justifying it, I am saying what I think is the reason why players do it. it is cheating, of course it is, but if officials choose to fall for the likes of the K*ts*n's of this world, whether it be through incompetence or intimidation, for whatever reason it is their fault for the epidemic.

[CusworthRovers]

There's a few sound people on here don't think he cheated or dived.

None of the players protested against Copps at the time to say he dived or cheated.

Copps/DRFC didn't say anything post match about diving or cheating.

Johnson never took advantage of the situation (or to mask their defeat) to say he should have been booked for diving or cheating.

Crucially and the final piece of evidence, the ref or lino didn't book him, talk to him or do anything........which suggests they never thought he dived or cheated.

It might just be you're a tad wrong here Billy Boy in your theory.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Cussy

The ref didn't give a penalty when Furman put two hands in that lad's back and pushed him. The Yeovil players didn't go berserk. It was still a foul though. He didn't book Weelens when he dived in on the keeper. The Yeovil players didn't scream for a booking. It still should have been a booking.

As I said, what would your feeling have been if a Yeovil player had gone down in identical fashion (including outstretched arms and appeal) and the ref had awarded a penalty? Would you really have thought that the opposition player was straight and honest?

[StocktonRover]

I don't think that he dived at all. He lost balance whilst turning felt and fell - on the way down he felt the defenders leg brush against his and he appealed.
Yes he appealed even though it wasn't a foul but he didn't dive - there is a difference.

[Bentley Bullet]

Even at throw-ins players from both sides raise their arms to claim it's their throw. It's obvious that someone's 'cheating', but it's acknowledged  as part of the game.

[CusworthRovers]

Cussy
As I said, what would your feeling have been if a Yeovil player had gone down in identical fashion (including outstretched arms and appeal) and the ref had awarded a penalty? Would you really have thought that the opposition player was straight and honest?

Had a Yeovil player done that:

Firstly at the game, I would have been calling for a card for the Yeovil player in a bias manner of being a Rovers fan and to try and influence the ref not to give it along with 6000 other fans.

Secondly on tele later, I would have honestly said, (having seen the replay), that he didn't dive or cheat, and that his body positioning caused him to go down and probably not fully realise how and that the ref did the right thing in not booking him or even talking to him...... just like he did with our player.

[Dagenham Rover]

Had a Yoovil player done that given our record against them I would have fully expected a penalty to be awarded and our player to be sent off even if it happened in the centre circle   

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hats off to you Cussy. You're a bugger man than I. If I'd seen Yeovil given a penalty after a player going down like that, after calmly watching the video evidence, I'd have brayed the bairns, crucified the cat on a cross made of lolly sticks, tacked her to a big f**king firework rocket and sent her off into the troposphere, chucked the telly down the stairs, then written a letter of complaint to the lead singer of Echo and the Bunnymen.

And I don't even HAVE a cat. I'd have gone out and bought one just for the purpose.

And I'd have trawled the streets, demanding to smell the breath of anyone coming out of a pub and kicking seven shades of shite out of them if they even gave the merest hint if having drunk cider.

[Sammy Chung was King]

His goal got us here in the first place,but that doesn't put him above being debated about,for me and i know this is sacrilege to some,his legs if they have not already are on they're way to being gone,he can't get up and down the pitch as well,he doesn't influence a game like he used to,but i still think he's a useful player to have on hand for his experience,for the last twenty minutes in a match,similar to how Man utd use Giggs,you don't throw away vast experience if they can still contribute to the squad.

Cotterill i'm really disappointed it's not happening at the minute for him,but if his crosses are not quite producing,because of how he plays,people will always notice him not tracking back etc,that's never been his game,but that does contribute in him not influencing games enough,i think a compromise needs to be reached with how he plays,he needs to do some closing down,but not to a point where he gets the ball and is too tired to deliver,because the slightest chance in this league has to be taken,whether it be a cross or shot on goal,because you won't get as many as league one,as a winger he needs to tuck into the midfield a bit more and get involved,he's a very typical winger either fantastic or totally off form,something's missing,and only Cott's can get it back.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Saunders said something, 12 months ago about how every manager that Cotterill had ever had told him how to work on the weaknesses in his game. But Saunders' approach was to constantly remind him that the strengths of his game were as strong as anyone else at sub-PL level.

Very, very perceptive. And it's no coincidence that Cotterill produced the best form of his career under Saunders. And that he's looked like a lost kid since.

He needs someone to put an arm round him and remind him that he COULD be devastating.

[Capmeister]

There is nobody better with a ball at his feet running through opponents. No one at the Rovers.

Do you disagree Aid?

Cheers Cap.

We clearly have a different opinion on what's important in football. You approve of players cheating? Grand. Your choice. I could call you an inadequate t**t who puts winning over everything, but I'll not stoop to daft name calling.

Your welcome Saint Stubbs.

Missionary work could be a forte. Albeit the subtlety of your preaching about how the beautiful game should be played maybe lost on all but the most slavish of potential followers woo-ed by skillful scribing. No-one likes a cheat. You ever cheated at footy? Answer honestly now my future little pontiff!!!! I'm flattered my inadequacy pricks your sensibilities.   

[BillyStubbsTears]

Ever cheated at football.

Not as far as I can recall. Certainly I never dived and claimed a foul. I never appealed for a throw when I knew I'd played the ball out.

Nowt to do with being holier than thou. I just didn't and don't see the point in doing it. The challenge for me at football was whether I and my team were better at playing football than the other team. Pretty simple really.

I appreciate that players whose livelihoods depend on winning might have a different outlook.

Still think a cheating Kitson is a cheating Kitson though, whatever the explanation.

And you didn't prick my sensibilities. They are prick-proof.