Talk:Battle of Bramall Lane

FIFA guideline
I understand that this game was abandoned based on a defined FIFA guideline that a game shouldn't continue when a team is reduced to fewer that 7 men. Is this the only match that this has ever happened in at a professional level? If so, this is worthy of note. If not, perhaps others might be mentioned? - 81.100.216.53 23:37, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * No, it is not the only game that ended because one team was reduced to less than 7 players. The 1981 Copa Libertadores First Place Playoff match between Flamengo and Atlético Mineiro, played on August 21 of that year, also ended in this way (Atlético was reduced to only 6 players). See this [link]. Regards, Carioca 02:19, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

It is, however, the only such time it has happend in English professional football. 86.128.96.77 13:01, 23 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Either way, the seven-man FIFA guideline should be mentioned in the text; as it stands it looks as though Eddie Wolstenholme made a purely subjective decision to abandon the match. Loganberry (Talk) 16:48, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Refereeing Bias?
The article states that the ref in this particular game failed to book a single WBA player, I haven't seen the game but if there was a "mass brawl" it would be highly unusual for no WBA player to be shown a yellow card. Was there any history of bad blood between Wolstenholme and Shef Utd? I am not implying that there is anything underhand going on but it just seems a little surprising 194.202.65.164 07:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC) Dave N 28/09/07
 * Not aware of any bad blood. It may have been highly unusual, but unless any further evidence can be found related to this, we can't speculate on Wolstenholme's possible motives, only state the facts. --Jameboy 11:30, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

The article seems to be subtly suggesting the referee was biased. Particularly the sentence regarding him not booking any West Brom players, and the sentence at the end of the article which emphasizes the fact he refereed the game where West Brom got promoted. Do these facts really need pointing out? 77.101.205.2 (talk) 23:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed those two sentences; I think they could be read as you suggest and they add nothing to the article. Marcus22 (talk) 09:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Ullathorne ruled out for rest of season?
Soccerbase disagrees with the statement that Robert Ullathorne was ruled out for the rest of the season and has him playing in 3 more games

http://www.soccerbase.com/players_details.sd?playerid=8089

I can't link directly to the season since the webpage must use Java or PHP but just search for 2001/02 season and it has him playing three games after this fixture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.1.52.176 (talk) 18:55, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I have amended the text by removing the claim Ullathorne failed to play another game as it is proven on Soccerbase that he played three further games that season.Statto74 (talk) 10:44, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Scoreline A:A
Is there any reason to display the scoreline as "A" : "A" for the sides when for all intents and purposes West Brom won the match 3-0 (as awarded by the FA and as the basis for calculating the 'win' for points). I understand that this was a special match, but highlighting it in the infobox is just cruft to appeal to individual idiosyncracies and not useful to the average reader. Colipon+ (Talk) 18:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)