Harriers Chatter

I thought at the time that Davis was at fault (and slow to react) to allow Shrimpton to get past him and clear on goal, for a player of his experience that was naïve. There has to be some sort of protocol introduced whereby any player that goes down with a head injury (ref stopping the play) has to sit out for a minimum of five(?) minutes and be assessed by a doctor for concussion/injury before being allowed back on. I have never seen a game where so many players feigned head injuries - at least that black art has not infiltrated Harriers game. Used to think Stevenage were the kings of the dark arts but Chester have taken it to a new level and the game is the poorer for it.

HarrierN2 wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 2:34 pm I think "head injury" footage should be analysed after the game and a clear and obviously feigned head injury should result in a one match ban. That'd sort things out pretty quickly.

Unfortunately, that's after the event, it needs to be in real time so that the game isn't affected.

A lot of hoofball visible from the highlights. Why did Thompson shoot after that break from the corner on 30 mins or so? Likewise again on 59 mins or so. And again on 73 mins before their goal. Wasted, wasted, wasted. Donnelly looks a livewire still. Dibble could have done better for their goal.

The fact there are no highlights to speak of between 74 mins and 96 says a lot as well!

Showing the "head injuries" wouldn't have shown the ref in a bad light, he has no choice but to stop the game. It wouldn't have shown the Chester players (or their manager) in a good light though.

As I said earlier, immediately sub off any "head injuried" player, sorted.

maxspeed wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 2:55 pm

HarrierN2 wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 2:34 pm I think "head injury" footage should be analysed after the game and a clear and obviously feigned head injury should result in a one match ban. That'd sort things out pretty quickly.

Unfortunately, that's after the event, it needs to be in real time so that the game isn't affected.

If players/managers thought a one match ban was waiting then they wouldn't do it.

Can't see how the ref is being blamed for the head injuries stoppages. It's the literal protocol, if he doesn't follow it and there is a serious injury he's face major consequences.

The issue is the the refs it's the protocol. If a player is down with a head injury there has to be a proper concussion test for several minutes off the pitch for the players own safety. Simple. You'd stop the divers then.

I'll blame the ref for inconsistent decisions but not for head injuries

I was not there on Saturday but the three home games prior I have seen the referee has been poor. Something needs to be done to help remedy the matter.

i've been banging on about refs , and the lack of respect for refs, for years.
The PFA. county FA's and clubs themselves should insist all apprentices take their county FA refereeing badge as part of their syllabus.
That way youngsters grow up knowing the rules, gain respect for refs on realising how difficult it is, and local football ( in crisis due to lack of officials) gets a few more referees to officiate.

Jack Hammer wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 2:33 pm

tonythescout wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 1:38 pm

COYRedder wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 1:23 pm

Phil wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 12:38 pm

Surely any highlights should include the three occasions in the second half that Harriers were on the break into the Chester half with a numerical advantage only for play to be stopped because one of their players suffered a 'head injury'. Who is censoring what is shown? Is there a pact between the club and the 'authorities' that we don't include anything that shows the referee in a bad light?

I very much doubt that there is 'censoring'. I have been a defender of refs in the past. I was not there on Saturday but the three home games prior I have seen the referee has been poor. Something needs to be done to help remedy the matter.
Could Dibble have done better with their goal? Why didnt Davis take a yellow for it.
Some goal from Cooper.

I'd agree that there seems to be a policy of not showing contentious incidents, if possible.

On 1:40 I think it was a superb block from Obi, rather than a Dibble save.

Not sure Dibble was positioned well enough for their goal. Not for the first time, but I wouldn't swap him.

I will give Dibble the benefit of doubt with regards to his positioning but yes I would swap him , I would take the Chester keeper in a heartbeat

We have the second best defence in the league with 37 conceded, as against 60 by Chester. I'm thankful for what we have.

Badger wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 6:53 pm

Jack Hammer wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 2:33 pm

tonythescout wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 1:38 pm

COYRedder wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 1:23 pm

Phil wrote: Mon Mar 16, 2026 12:38 pm

Surely any highlights should include the three occasions in the second half that Harriers were on the break into the Chester half with a numerical advantage only for play to be stopped because one of their players suffered a 'head injury'. Who is censoring what is shown? Is there a pact between the club and the 'authorities' that we don't include anything that shows the referee in a bad light?

I very much doubt that there is 'censoring'. I have been a defender of refs in the past. I was not there on Saturday but the three home games prior I have seen the referee has been poor. Something needs to be done to help remedy the matter.
Could Dibble have done better with their goal? Why didnt Davis take a yellow for it.
Some goal from Cooper.

I'd agree that there seems to be a policy of not showing contentious incidents, if possible.

On 1:40 I think it was a superb block from Obi, rather than a Dibble save.

Not sure Dibble was positioned well enough for their goal. Not for the first time, but I wouldn't swap him.

I will give Dibble the benefit of doubt with regards to his positioning but yes I would swap him , I would take the Chester keeper in a heartbeat

surely this is a parody account?