eardun Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Looking at that video, this is a ludicrous decision. By all means decide that a red was too harsh and it should have been yellow, but no way was that simulation by Wright. Basically the FA are supporting the aggressor and penalising the victim. Are they saying that they would have preferred Wright to hit him back instead of falling over? Unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selred Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Super said: The problem maybe is he goes down holding his face. If so Burton should of had 4 players suspended after our game for the amount of head injuries they suspiciously had which stopped play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidercity1987 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 I'm not on Twitter. Can someone please tweet for me.. 'Who were the panel and who do they support? A) FFC, B) CCFC, C) SWFC? As that is the only rational reason for such a bizarre decision.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin101 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 7 minutes ago, Super said: Be interested to know who was on that panel?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Someone from the Club should get on Sky Sports and hint we are going to play with 10 men tomorrow in protest, as our Club captains reputation has been tarnished. Sky are not even showing the footage of the incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon79 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Wonder whether this will be picked up by & discussed on TalkSport. I'm sure I caught a section when they were talking about this exact topic recently. With regards the incident itself, I find it amazing that any panel ( especially so called people in the game) would come up with that conclusion. To then add that you cannot appeal the decision is somewhat draconian imo. COYR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 What a shambles. There's no way that is simulation or deceiving an official. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Just now, Simon79 said: Wonder whether this will be picked up by & discussed on TalkSport. I'm sure I caught a section when they were talking about this exact topic recently. With regards the incident itself, I find it amazing that any panel ( especially so called people in the game) would come up with that conclusion. To then add that you cannot appeal the decision is somewhat draconian imo. COYR As much as I dislike the ginger prick I'm pretty sure Durham would take this on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East End Old Boy Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 28 minutes ago, phantom said: Question is if the ref DIDN'T see any contact etc, WHY did he send the player off? Surely the ref has to see an incident and not just ASSUME the player has done wrong? Linesman saw it and reported to referee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin101 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Bryan - Magnússon - Flint - Vyner Hmm. Not ideal. How frustrating that for both Leeds and Cardiff we've had a severely depleted line up. Not so confident now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Absolutely a ******* farse and rightly consulting the legal team that is ******* ridiculous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 We're just a bunch of divers and cheats... Colins fan club will be along shortly to fill in the blanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 6 minutes ago, Selred said: If so Burton should of had 4 players suspended after our game for the amount of head injuries they suspiciously had which stopped play. Only thing I can think of. Clearly he wasn't caught in the face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 28 minutes ago, phantom said: Question is if the ref DIDN'T see any contact etc, WHY did he send the player off? Surely the ref has to see an incident and not just ASSUME the player has done wrong? 18 minutes ago, RedM said: I was at the game and saw Bailey go down but my attention was on the Ref booking Flint at the time. I remember Joe going over to the linesman and asking him to speak to the Ref, so I guess it was him that advised the Ref to give the red card. Cannot see anything wrong with the decision at the time or now with video evidence. I listened on the radio, commentator picked up the incident and said hands to face. His first thought was there should be some action , with that he said the linesman had come on the pitch, so it was him that saw it. Absolute disgrace, I totally get the effort to end simulation but surely that has to be where no contact is made. That great lump would have put bigger men than BW on their ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ska Junkie Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 I get the impression, given the FA panel meet in Sloane square, just around the corner from Craven cottage that the FA don't want clubs from outside the usual suspects crashing their cash party in the Premier League. Bizarre decision, especially overturning the red card for Fulham's bloke, he was an argument waiting to happen on Tuesday night! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 30 minutes ago, phantom said: Question is if the ref DIDN'T see any contact etc, WHY did he send the player off? Surely the ref has to see an incident and not just ASSUME the player has done wrong? He did consult with linesman so assume that ino saw it. Is there any video of the incident when the Kamara put Joe Bryan over the advertising boards? Fulham now contesting the red card for someone who was clearly out to cause problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Perhaps we are being just a bit too good for the big clubs . Slow us down a bit so they can catch up . Disgraceful decision . Let's use this anger to show them that we can win without and for Bailey Wright . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ska Junkie Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 The FA don't like us The FA don't like us The FA don't like us We don't care etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Does this mean he misses one of the international matches ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted November 3, 2017 Admin Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, cidered abroad said: He did consult with linesman so assume that ino saw it. Is there any video of the incident when the Kamara put Joe Bryan over the advertising boards? Fulham now contesting the red card for someone who was clearly out to cause problems. They've already won the appeal @cidered abroad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted November 3, 2017 Admin Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Just now, Major Isewater said: Does this mean he misses one of the international matches ? No, they don't crossover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge1981 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Serious question... What will be the result of us contacting our legal team? Our most important game of the season so far - the Cardiff game would have already passed us by so at best we will have Wright available for the Sheff Wednesday game where we should by then have Baker and Pisano available. Anyone think we’d get compensation or something? I agree we should speak to our legal team but struggle to see what we will get out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted November 3, 2017 Admin Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said: I get the impression, given the FA panel meet in Sloane square It sounds like each member of the panel views it on their own - then IF all three agree the decision is announced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View from the Dolman Posted November 3, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Major Isewater said: Does this mean he misses one of the international matches ? No, the ban will be for club matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 It seems so wrong you cannot appeal this. You should have a couple of weeks to prepare and go to a hearing and then take the punishment if need be. Something like this should not be with immediate effect. I can't believe the player physically assaulted Bailey, yes that's what it was as they weren't playing football at the time, will be back playing and Bailey is branded a cheat and sat on the sidelines. If he did it fair enough he has left himself and the side down but for everyone to be punished in this case is totally unjust. What can we do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILINFRANCE Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 39 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said: Club response: https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/bristol-city-fc-statement-bailey-wright/ Fair to say that Mark Ashton has come out fighting with that statement. Contained in the Club statement is a video clip of the incident. I am baffled as to how, on watching the clip, it might be construed BW was simulating - he was pushed and fell over! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 I think Fulham must have employed lawyer Bob Mattingburg from Blackadder: Edmund: "I remember Mattingburg’s most famous case, the case of the bloody knife. A man was found next to a murdured body, he had the knife in his hand, thirteen witnesses that seen him stab the victim, when the police arrived he said, “I’m glad I killed the bastard.” Mattingburg not only got him off, but he got him knighted in the New Year’s Honors list, and the relatives of the victim had to pay to have the blood washed out of his jacket." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 I wish the FA would FO. Not just this latest idiocy, but they've done nothing but hinder the game in this country at every level. Prime candidate to be abolished as unfit for purpose and replaced with a new more professional, more transparent structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carey 6 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Pushed in the chest gone down holding his face. Simple push isn't enough for a red card is it? I've only ever seen players be booked for pushing. So the red was obviously issued on the basis he was hit in the face. If it wasn't a City player I'm not so sure you'd all be seeing it the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.