Nah just having a bit of a joke at an obvious error. I knew what Div really meant due to the context of the thread, but the post amused me because it was so factual yet that last paragraph missed the obvious fact there could be a fair challenge. In turn I'd hope my post wouldn't be taken too seriously.
It wasn't picking a fight at all and it certainly wasn't as bad as Div's post the other night (which actually made me laugh). Clearly the two of you know each other though and something's put your noses out of joint.
the last paragraph says 'Tackles with 'studs up' are reckless, even if its an innocuous challenge and most don't think it's a foul! ' nothing missing from that
Fair tackles are hard to come by, there is no longer the 'ball before man' - if a defender takes the attacker out (or just clips him) after taking the ball cleanly (by whatever force) then it's a free-kick, but, for any good reasonable man, that is going to be impossible. This is where referees (well, the majority) use common sense - some tackles look so clean that awarding a free-kick can cause more problems than good, does he really want to caution several players for dissent because he wasn't bending the laws slightly, to the tempo/behaviour of the game? Another thing to remember is that refereeing, and making these sorts of decisions, is all about 'the opinion of the referee', so there isn't any real point in arguing - he may be wrong from your angle, but he could be right from his - granted, that could be the shittest view to take but what else is he going to go on.
(i can't remember my post the other night, i'm glad it made you laugh though. as for Santas Dead, he's probably just got nothing better to do than hate the world, accusing people of starting fights, you big playground bullies, i'll get Crispy and his lads to sort you at lunch...)
