Page 24 of 24
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 3:22 pm
by Shogun
I think it would be weird for Keane to choose now to pull that sort of shithousery for the first time in his career.
It's a red by the law but I think he's probably quite unlucky as well. 3 matches seems like it would be overkill.
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 4:06 pm
by Matt1878
brap2 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 08, 2026 3:16 pm
Lads what on earth are we talking about? He's pulled his fucking hair?
If you cynically pull a defenders hair at a set piece or when chasing them down, 100% agree. But in the context of a challenge where heads, limbs and hair is one tangled mess, then commom sense should prevail.
If anything he grabbed during the challenge and got hold of a bit of his hair but I didnt see any indication of him trying to gain an advantage by pulling him down.
You have to surely pull on his hair for it to be an offence, he just.. held?... his hair, as they fell down and it wasn't violent conduct in any sense. Ref isnt going to go that deep into it though, he"s put on the spot by VAR, so I dont blame him, its just the fucking eye of sauron looking to get involved from up on high again.
Got to say we've had some crazy incidents this year already..
Yellow card for taking a free kick
Handball on Tarks when both hands behind his back
Handball on KDH given at point blank range, equivalent one against Burnley turned down.
Gana slap on Keane.
And now hair-gate followed by a Grealish hissy fit.
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 5:33 pm
by UnsyisaRhino
brap2 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 08, 2026 3:16 pm
Lads what on earth are we talking about? He's pulled his fucking hair?
Intentionally?
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 5:54 pm
by weimaranerblues
That's what I said at the time , he didn't in my view intend to pull his hair , as stated he held it fractionally, , didn't pull it as in the currella sense. ... It's a red by law but violent Conduct. Nah they are just spouting the. Rule .
Should we appeal ! Yes will we be successful doubt it...
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 6:01 pm
by brap2
What does this mean! Did he think it was something else?
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 7:27 pm
by Toddacelli
brap2 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 08, 2026 6:01 pm
What does this mean! Did he think it was something else?
Mate, I’m 90% of the way with you - I don’t think it was intentional but it looks like he did pull his hair, regardless of intent or not, so I can see it as a red. No problem.
3-match ban for violent conduct though? No.
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 7:31 pm
by UnsyisaRhino
brap2 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 08, 2026 6:01 pm
What does this mean! Did he think it was something else?
It's time like this where I can't tell if you're trolling or not.
When was he meant to be thinking about it? He wasn't looking at his hand or the guys hair, he had his eyes on the ball the entire time. He's holding onto his hair for what, half a second?
He didn't think about it at all as that's not where his focus was, that's the point, it was accidental.
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 7:37 pm
by The Doc
UnsyisaRhino wrote: ↑Thu Jan 08, 2026 7:31 pm
It's time like this where I can't tell if you're trolling or not.
When was he meant to be thinking about it? He wasn't looking at his hand or the guys hair, he had his eyes on the ball the entire time. He's holding onto his hair for what, half a second?
He didn't think about it at all as that's not where his focus was, that's the point, it was accidental.
It was 100% accidental. He's in the air, eyes on the ball concentrating on getting his head on it.
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 8:32 pm
by Risky
Yeah I think it's accidental in the sense that he never consciously made a decision to pull his hair. I think he's got his hand up there as defenders often would in that situation and then for some reason he's instinctively grabbed his dreads when they've contacted his hand.
Ultimately he's pulled the lads hair and that's a red card, but the punishment in terms of the suspension doesn't fit the crime.
I also feel for the ref slightly in that he's a young ref and once he's been told to check it on VAR he's basically got little choice other than to send him off.
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 8:52 pm
by brap2
UnsyisaRhino wrote: ↑Thu Jan 08, 2026 7:31 pm
It's time like this where I can't tell if you're trolling or not.
When was he meant to be thinking about it? He wasn't looking at his hand or the guys hair, he had his eyes on the ball the entire time. He's holding onto his hair for what, half a second?
He didn't think about it at all as that's not where his focus was, that's the point, it was accidental.
He leverages himself using the lads body weight by yanking his hair as he heads the ball.
https://streamin.link/v/9fc0edf2
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 10:17 pm
by UnsyisaRhino
Intent.
Ever stubbed your toe?
Re: James Tarkowski
Posted: Thu Jan 08, 2026 10:30 pm
by brap2
UnsyisaRhino wrote: ↑Thu Jan 08, 2026 10:17 pm
Intent.
Ever stubbed your toe?
I will never agree that he's accidentally curled his grip around the lads hair, if you can believe that more power to you but that does not sound like a thing that happens to me