Bruno Guimarães

[wykikitoon 20117]

 

Bruno's agent

 

[PaddockLad 17244]

Oh he’s off to Real Madrid! 😀

[Howmanheyman 33145]

20 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

 

Bruno's agent

 

 

Bruno's real agent.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'The Rio Steakhouse connection.'

 

(Ah seen 'im in there once. Ahm canny sure he recognised iz, like).

 

[Dougle 3329]

10 hours ago, Howmanheyman said:

 

I love Bruno but he's a right tart on social media. 

 

Is MMCSTDFFSIVF your alt account?

[RobinRobin 11262]

13 hours ago, Howmanheyman said:

 

I love Bruno but he's a right tart on social media. 

I thought that was the point of social media 

[Howmanheyman 33145]

8 hours ago, Dougle said:

 

Is MMCSTDFFSIVF your alt account?

 

No idea what that is but I don't have an alt account. 

[wykikitoon 20117]

 

 

 

[Gemmill 44814]

Christ he only joined a year ago. Mental how much has been achieved in the last 12 months. 

[Tom 14011]

I also hope he lives more years. He’s like 24  

[NJS 4378]

I know appealing would be pointless and also it would be 100% whataboutery but I'd love it if just for a laugh we paid for a top lawyer to appeal armed with a comparison of the Fabinho tackle and VAR decision. 

[Alex 35064]

2 minutes ago, NJS said:

I know appealing would be pointless and also it would be 100% whataboutery but I'd love it if just for a laugh we paid for a top lawyer to appeal armed with a comparison of the Fabinho tackle and VAR decision. 

They’d just say the Fabinho one was an error and VAR officials have been briefed accordingly. I thought Fabinho’s was worse due to the obvious intent 

[Dr Gloom 21912]

49 minutes ago, Alex said:

They’d just say the Fabinho one was an error and VAR officials have been briefed accordingly. I thought Fabinho’s was worse due to the obvious intent 

Fabinho fucking knew he got away with it too. It was a shockingly bad challenge and deserved a straight red - staggering that VAR didn’t pick it up but they don’t do that with Liverpool.

 

Bruno’s was a red too but there was no intent. It was a mistimed challenge at the end of the game.

[OTF 7295]

Yeah Fabinho's was miles worse as it was from behind. Bruno's was belligerent based on him being cheesed off about some earlier poor calls.

[OTF 7295]

2 hours ago, Alex said:

They’d just say the Fabinho one was an error and VAR officials have been briefed accordingly. I thought Fabinho’s was worse due to the obvious intent 

I think they've already come out and said that VAR got that wrong. Didn't hand out a suspension to correct the error mind...

[Craig 6682]

There was absolutely no malice from Bruno but that doesn’t alter the fact it was a horrendous tackle rightly punishable by a red card.
 

The failure to call out Fabinho’s and Robertson’s - which in my opinion was worse - doesn’t make Bruno’s any less of a red.

 

Appealing it would be a pointless waste of time that we’d better spend focused on other things. We need to take it on the chin and accept the 3-game ban.

[wykikitoon 20117]

Aye, the kids lucky it could have been a lot worse for him.  It was poor from Bruno.  

[Craig 6682]

23 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

Aye, the kids lucky it could have been a lot worse for him.  It was poor from Bruno.  

 

I don't think it was necessarily 'poor', just mistimed. But in today's game it's a straight red card. 

 

Anyone questioning it needs to ask themselves what their reaction would have been had it been done to one of our players. We'd all be screaming for a red card, and rightly so.

[Renton 21592]

1 hour ago, OTF said:

I think they've already come out and said that VAR got that wrong. Didn't hand out a suspension to correct the error mind...

 

Why not though? Have retrospective bans been stopped now? This obviously affects us against Liverpool in a couple of weeks. We lose Bruno, they keep Fabhino, which is a rhyme, that doesn't befit the crime. 

[Howay 12496]

4 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Why not though? Have retrospective bans been stopped now? This obviously affects us against Liverpool in a couple of weeks. We lose Bruno, they keep Fabhino, which is a rhyme, that doesn't befit the crime. 

He was booked, so there’s a fucking ridiculous rule where if the player was booked it’s deemed the ref hadn’t missed the incident he just saw it as a bookable offense so they won’t upgrade the punishment despite everyone and their dog knowing the decision was completely wrong. 
 

Makes a fucking farce of the entire thing but here we are. 

[Renton 21592]

1 minute ago, Howay said:

He was booked, so there’s a fucking ridiculous rule where if the player was booked it’s deemed the ref hadn’t missed the incident he just saw it as a bookable offense so they won’t upgrade the punishment despite everyone and their dog knowing the decision was completely wrong. 
 

Makes a fucking farce of the entire thing but here we are. 

 

Yeah, I thought things might have changed since VAR was introduced but I guess not. Watch Fabinho score against us then, nailed on. 

[Craig 6682]

The difference being that Darren England is better at this VAR malarkey than Neil Swarbrick. 

Swarbrick didn't intervene so there's sadly no mechanism for retrospectively changing the outcome. 

[ohhh_yeah 2964]

 

Bruno has been inked by someone.

 

 

   

[OTF 7295]

Can you imagine getting an Asian gambling company tattooed on your leg?

 

Could have stopped above that and would have looked loads better.

[RobinRobin 11262]

33 minutes ago, OTF said:

Can you imagine getting tattooed on your leg?

 

FYP

[ohhh_yeah 2964]

1 hour ago, RobinRobin said:

 

Can you imagine getting tattooed on your leg?

 

 

Why imagine, when you can do the damn thing? I have a calf tattoo, you puff.