Should Leeds goal against Villa have stood?

[Leicesterbaggie]

Of course it should! There is nothing in the rules that states that if an opposition player is injured you have to kick the ball out of play. Villa should have played to the whistle and asked questions afterwards. I'm fed up with players losing possession, going down injured and expecting the opposition to kick the ball out of play. It is up to the referee to stop the game if he thinks it necessary. I agree that Villa did kick the ball out when a Leeds player was injured and morally Leeds should probably have done the same. However, in my opinion it should be left up to the referee and the game should continue unless he thinks the game should be stopped. In this way it would stop players going down and feigning injury.

[boingy]

Quite right.

[Whicka_Mon]

It did stand.
They wouldn't have let Villa score that if it was a play off game.

[Dubbag]

The ref is obliged to stop a game if it is in his view a head injury or a nasty collision between players. Any thing else and the game can only be stopped if the ball goes out of play. The sporting rule (where an opponent kicks the ball out of play) is not to my mind an actual rule. So it is up to the players. In this case the guy went down clutching his leg...hardly a massive medical emergency. Some players dive which is not very sporting, nor is pulling the jersey of your opponent. Many do this...who perhaps scream fair play when it suits them..
Doing something because someone else does is not always a good policy....
Football is no longer a sport...its a business.....
All that said...the Leeds manager showed a lot od fair play...when he really did not have too.
Well done him...

[SwedishBaggie]

Of course it should! There is nothing in the rules that states that if an opposition player is injured you have to kick the ball out of play. Villa should have played to the whistle and asked questions afterwards. I'm fed up with players losing possession, going down injured and expecting the opposition to kick the ball out of play. It is up to the referee to stop the game if he thinks it necessary. I agree that Villa did kick the ball out when a Leeds player was injured and morally Leeds should probably have done the same. However, in my opinion it should be left up to the referee and the game should continue unless he thinks the game should be stopped. In this way it would stop players going down and feigning injury.

Indeed so.

[Yarmbaggie]

Of course it should! There is nothing in the rules that states that if an opposition player is injured you have to kick the ball out of play. Villa should have played to the whistle and asked questions afterwards. I'm fed up with players losing possession, going down injured and expecting the opposition to kick the ball out of play. It is up to the referee to stop the game if he thinks it necessary. I agree that Villa did kick the ball out when a Leeds player was injured and morally Leeds should probably have done the same. However, in my opinion it should be left up to the referee and the game should continue unless he thinks the game should be stopped. In this way it would stop players going down and feigning injury.

The referral immediately waved play on when the Villa player went down. The ref was no more than 5 feet away from him as well and he wasn’t concerned and it certainly was not a head injury.

No sympathy at all with Villa they tried to stop the Leeds attack by getting the ball kicked out of play instead of playing to the whistle. Just cheating.

[Johnny on the spot 1]

Me personally I don't think the result should stand because the score could have had more serious repercussions if it were a team that were fighting for relegation, & cost a team their status in the division or cost a team a play off place , in this case it's not so bad because both teams are in the play offs on merit , but think of all the people who bet on Leeds to win & its cost them money I don't think that's fair , if I had an accumulator bet & i was waiting on Leeds & it cost me £2 to 3 hundred quid I would be spitting blood ,

[baggieal]

[QUOTE=Johnny on the spot 1;39208092]Me personally I don't think the result should stand because the score could have had more serious repercussions if it were a team that were fighting for relegation, & cost a team their status in the division or cost a team a play off place , in this case it's not so bad because both teams are in the play offs on merit , but think of all the people who bet on Leeds to win & its cost them money I don't think that's fair , if I had an accumulator bet & i was waiting on Leeds & it cost me £2 to 3 hundred quid I would be spitting blood ,[/QUvOTE]

Bielsa was stupid to let the Vile score and should have concentrated on strategies - ie a player not to feature in further matches stamping on Grealish’s foot to end his season. Grealish went down more times than Jordan in her prime!

[mickd1961]

Kodjia “injured” himself in a ridiculous attempt to win the ball and feigned injury when his attempt failed.

He then went off purely to try to fool everyone he was injured.

All this said Leeds were a disgrace in looking as if they were going to kick the ball out and then playing on.

Two absolute s h I t house clubs both of low moral fortitude.

[baggieal]

Kodjia “injured” himself in a ridiculous attempt to win the ball and feigned injury when his attempt failed.

He then went off purely to try to fool everyone he was injured.

All this said Leeds were a disgrace in looking as if they were going to kick the ball out and then playing on.

Two absolute s h I t house clubs both of low moral fortitude.

Both have complete and utter tossers as supporters too! Big Clubs in the days of Petula Clark! Although Down Town is far far away from the s hit hole called Witton!