Bar BS3 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 7 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said: You're not understanding my point. The panel appear to have decided that Wright gets pushed in the torso/arm but he pretends it was to his face - that's simulation, nothing to do with what the Fulham player did, it's what Wright did. Forget the Fulham player - we're agreed he deserved a red for raising his arms. Fair enough, but I don’t believe that the footage is conclusive enough that there was no contact above the torso. There was certainly heavy contact, more than likely deliberate and arms were raised. Bailey got whacked, somewhere. He’s entitled to let the referee know about it! “Simulation” would be throwing yourself to the floor, with no relevant contact whatsoever. That is NOT the case here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddevon Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Perhaps whilst they were meeting they could have made a decision on our West Ham FA Cup match! (I am still p****d off about this!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 The fact that Kamara did not even have his punishment downgraded to a yellow, would suggest that the panel decided that Wright dived. As in all this discussion it must remembered that this took place during a break in play. Which would mean a yellow at least, otherwise there will be a free for all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Bailey might just as well have whacked him back, he would have got less punishment. #FAFarce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidercity1987 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 By the way, what a brilliant statement from Mark Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midred Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Think FA are still "testing the waters". The only previous case involved Carlisle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidercity1987 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Another point is that this was literally 30 seconds after Wright utterly bizarrely had a goal ruled out by an awful offside decision Jokers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Chris Posted November 3, 2017 Admin Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 23 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said: Yep, he's one of the potential panellists. My quote in post #194 covers how it works. You mean ex-Fulham player Danny Murphy? Case solved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, Midred said: Think FA are still "testing the waters". The only previous case involved Carlisle! Which resulted in a shit decision as well, the guy got suspended for not appealing for a penalty and his first instinct being to play on. On Bailey, the statement says clearly Bailey didn't stay down because of the push, he landed awkwardly on the top of his back/bottom of his neck. How can the FA panel determine whether he was actually hurt or not?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redapple Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 I would just like to add my bit to this general out-pouring of in-justice. I think the club have done well and should see this to a satisfactory conclusion . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 1 hour ago, Dave said: Don’t forget we had someone sent of this season for being head butted. How many apology letters are we expecting this season from the league referees association? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slippin cider Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 5 minutes ago, JonDolman said: It looks like he contacts with wrights neck with his fist of hand. With the added force of forward motion, running towards him and kamara being a big lump, that would send anyone flying to the ground. Incredible decision from the FA. There's no way of knowing how much that hurt Wright. None of this would have happened if kamara hadnt done it in the first place. Something going on here for them to decide this. No way can anyone in their right mind come to this decision. Exactly! ....something stinks ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatalist Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 16 minutes ago, Tinmans Love Child said: Whilst it’s annoying and this decision is going to impact us tomorrow (booooo) Footballers (and now BW) have themselves to blame. For too long it’s been deemed acceptable that if somebody comes in contact with you then you have the right to fall to the floor. Football is a contact sport, so IMO you don’t have the right to just fall over and say ‘well he made contact’. For me whether BW was touched or not is irrelevant, he’s a big strong bloke and short of the other guy punching him in the face, I can’t see how BW ended up on the floor holding his face, unless he wanted to deceive the official. Why a push to the torso or arm or whatever results in BWs legs collapsing I don’t know. I would be embarrassed if I was BW to be honest. That said, retrospective banning with no right to appeal is not very good Kamara is over 13 stone and running at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrick's Marvels Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 9 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said: Fair enough, but I don’t believe that the footage is conclusive enough that there was no contact above the torso. There was certainly heavy contact, more than likely deliberate and arms were raised. Bailey got whacked, somewhere. He’s entitled to let the referee know about it! “Simulation” would be throwing yourself to the floor, with no relevant contact whatsoever. That is NOT the case here! The simulation has nothing to do with whether the Fulham player raised his arms (it's not disputed), nothing to do with the fact "Bailey got whacked" (it's not disputed), nothing to do with whetehr his fall to the floor was appropriate. The simulation is to do with where he got hit. The panel have decided it was not on the face and punished our player for pretending it was. Not sure how many different ways there are to explain it, so I'm out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petehinton Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Please for the love of god don't play Vyner. He is not ready for a game of this magnitude against a Warnock team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 I really, really, really can't say how focking angry i am by this decision. What a bunch of incompentent cntz we got running our beautiful game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hantsred Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 if you watch the video carefully the Fulham guy's arm is clearly moving towards and in an upwards motion - it is not a push but a deliberate forearm to neck/face area whilst running past. The only way the FA can salvage any credibility to this is to release another angle which shows there was no contact otherwise they have yet again shown themselves to be totally inept. I really want to see a fired up and angry city tomorrow to this injustice. It will be Colin who will be moaning at 14:00 that the FA mucked up his game plans and fired City to unstoppable 5-0 win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 How the heck does Warnock get so lucky? Just when we are in the sort of for to give him a bloody nose, for a change, not only are we hit with injuries to key players, the FA then slap us with the most ridiculous decision I can remember to deprive us of a third member of our defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1t_ref_again Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Being shown on https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/4835175/bristol-city-bailey-wright-diving-ban-aboubakar-kamara/ the bit that is not very clear, after he pushes him in the chest it appears that he catches him with the right elbow on the chin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 29 minutes ago, super_scotty_murray said: I do agree that there must have been numerous similar incidents over the course of this season that have not had such a punishment. Unfortunately someone was going to be made a scapegoat somewhere along the way and it is us. From now on they have be consistent with this if they have set this one as a precedent, otherwise I agree that we are being unfairly treated. I do think however that Bailey did make a meal of it, and therefore we of course are a little biased as he is one of our own. If the shoe was on the other foot I imagine we would see it differently. I am sure he made a meal of it. Most grown men would have maybe stumbled backwards only to take a step forward with a fist flying. It is just disappointing this is the scapegoat scenario because A) we have seen it a few times on match of the day, that is making a meal of contact and B) I am not convinced it will be on a regular basis. If it is continued to be called in this manner then I would gladly accept it but as I have said, this is the second retrospective ban handed out and there are probably 30-40 instances over a few hundred matches now that could have been handed down but haven’t. They are already showing inconsistencies which is my beef. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said: Being shown on https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/4835175/bristol-city-bailey-wright-diving-ban-aboubakar-kamara/ the bit that is not very clear, after he pushes him in the chest it appears that he catches him with the right elbow on the chin Watching it over and over and it ******* just beggars belief that he is getting a ban. One of the worst things i've seen happen in football. 2 games ban for being a clear victim. ABSOLUTE DISGRACE!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 10 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said: The simulation has nothing to do with whether the Fulham player raised his arms (it's not disputed), nothing to do with the fact "Bailey got whacked" (it's not disputed), nothing to do with whetehr his fall to the floor was appropriate. The simulation is to do with where he got hit. The panel have decided it was not on the face and punished our player for pretending it was. Not sure how many different ways there are to explain it, so I'm out. Our statement says Bailey stayed down after hurting top of his back/lower neck on impact falling awkwardly. How often do you see someone holding their face when hurt, very regularly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 7 minutes ago, downendcity said: How the heck does Warnock get so lucky? Just when we are in the sort of for to give him a bloody nose, for a change, not only are we hit with injuries to key players, the FA then slap us with the most ridiculous decision I can remember to deprive us of a third member of our defence. By moaning and whinging, and CHEATING and being a total cnt.. all the things that the FA reckon they are "dealing with". Idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 14 minutes ago, Keyardiv said: Well that's what they called it when Rivaldo did it: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2002/jun/05/worldcupfootball2002.sport17 Whether your player was guilty or not I think the term is clearly right for what he's been penalised for. I assume you are joking, right..?! You’d liken the situation of Rivaldo rolling around like a baby, after the football hits his leg, to that of someone who’s clearly been barged into, with force, by a player who had his arms raised and footage in inconclusive, either way as to whether the contact (and the was sizeable contact) was with his face or upper body area! Really..? You think the 2 are comparable..?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRISTOL86 Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 If this is a ban worthy offence by Wright then presumably there will never be a Premier League match played again now as no team will have more than about 3 players. Absolutely farcical decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WayOutWest Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 1 hour ago, Robin 101 said: Saddest thing is the most likely outcome of all this is we get a fine for that statement Said the same thing. Very inflammatory language used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Let's get a fine. ***k 'em. If we accepted this without a stink, we would be pussies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said: If this is a ban worthy offence by Wright then presumably there will never be a Premier League match played again now as no team will have more than about 3 players. Absolutely farcical decision. :laugh: Exactly right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sh1t_ref_again Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 when you look at the still, its not really good enough to see his elbow on BW's chin, but if you study the shape of kamara shoulder it raised as his elbow is up, which is a bit of a give away. Oh well, player pol axed and given ban for going over, after having a good goal disallowed in the same game, plus MT was send off for being head butted - gives you a lot of faith in ref's and FA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon uk Posted November 3, 2017 Report Share Posted November 3, 2017 Haha, this is the greatest example of fair and inspirational governance by the fa that the world has ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.