Jones faces FA investigation

[kwik1980]

Dave Jones could be in some trouble with the FA after calling referee Uriah Renne "useless" following Wolves' 2-0 loss to Southampton on Saturday.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=277381&cc=5901

Jones was angry most of all due to the fact that Beattie got a questionable penalty in the first half, and going by the standards of that call (which I saw on highlights. There was contact, but I don't think enough to warrant the call), Wolves should have had a penalty when Jody Craddock was taken down in the box later.

[CrewToon]

Originally posted by kwik1980
Dave Jones could be in some trouble with the FA after calling referee Uriah Renne "useless" following Wolves' 2-0 loss to Southampton on Saturday.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=277381&cc=5901



It's a shame that people are reprimanded for telling the truth.

[Desigol]

Originally posted by kwik1980
Dave Jones could be in some trouble with the FA after calling referee Uriah Renne "useless" following Wolves' 2-0 loss to Southampton on Saturday.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=277381&cc=5901

Jones was angry most of all due to the fact that Beattie got a questionable penalty in the first half, and going by the standards of that call (which I saw on highlights. There was contact, but I don't think enough to warrant the call), Wolves should have had a penalty when Jody Craddock was taken down in the box later.

Sounds pretty draconian. Criticising the Ref is part of the game.

[kwik1980]

The line that the FA tries to draw is where comments stop being about a poor performance, and start to imply, or outright state that a referee was being less than impartial.
Or, in other words, does "useless" mean that he was just frustrated that the close calls went against him, which happens sometime, or was he implying that Rennie was intentionally calling it Southampton's way, and not Wolves?
Saying "I thought it was a bad call" is all right. Saying, "the ref's on the take" is not.