cityexile Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 13 minutes ago, Like watching Brazil said: Holloway on TV just now said a yellow card would have been enough A three match ban certainly feels harsh. It was two players running at speed from some distance to get to it, and it was never one of those two legs off the ground potential leg breaker challenges that happen now and again - at the point of contact. He was committed and just got there second. He does jump in, and that is what does for him. Can see why a red was given, do not think it will be overturned, and was far from the worse decision given in the game. Just one of those where the punishment does not really fit the crime, even if it is a red. the speed at which they come together also makes it look much worse. Even if Baker had got the ball, their player was still going flying! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Rob Posted January 27, 2018 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 The fact Holloway thinks it was a yellow tells a story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crackers Corner Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 My first instinct was a red card however watching again I agree that this should have been a yellow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snufflelufagus Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 40 minutes ago, glynriley said: I thought it was a red all day long. But my Mrs just said Phil Thompson was doing the game on soccer Saturday and he said never a red. Opinions eh! look at my post above. it' a video of Thompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 13 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said: The fact Holloway thinks it was a yellow tells a story. He wants us to appeal, lose Baker for 4 games and lose most of them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 6 minutes ago, Snufflelufagus said: look at my post above. it' a video of Thompson Oh ah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foghornred Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 If Bakers was a red then the tackle on Diony which was two footed should have been red Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 36 minutes ago, cityexile said: A three match ban certainly feels harsh. It was two players running at speed from some distance to get to it, and it was never one of those two legs off the ground potential leg breaker challenges that happen now and again - at the point of contact. He was committed and just got there second. He does jump in, and that is what does for him. Can see why a red was given, do not think it will be overturned, and was far from the worse decision given in the game. Just one of those where the punishment does not really fit the crime, even if it is a red. the speed at which they come together also makes it look much worse. Even if Baker had got the ball, their player was still going flying! Why a three match ban? A straight red can still be a 1 match ban, 3 match bans tend to be for violent conduct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 2 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said: Why a three match ban? A straight red can still be a 1 match ban, 3 match bans tend to be for violent conduct Isn't it 1 match if its a professional foul? Baker's certainly wasn't a professional foul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityexile Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 2 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said: Why a three match ban? A straight red can still be a 1 match ban, 3 match bans tend to be for violent conduct It is a straight red for a dangerous tackle, which carries a three match ban. Or at least that is my understanding. Dissent is 2, and two yellows or for a professional foul is one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrytheb Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 1 match is for professional foul or 2 yellow cards. Assuming the club don't appeal, because rightly or wrongly I don't think they have a hope in hell of the 'independent' process changing it, Baker will have a 3 game ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 2 minutes ago, hodge said: Isn't it 1 match if its a professional foul? Baker's certainly wasn't a professional foul. If he doesn't make it then Scowen is through on Steele, about as clear a professional fouls as can be. 1 minute ago, cityexile said: It is a straight red for a dangerous tackle, which carries a three match ban. Or at least that is my understanding. Dissent is 2, and two yellows or for a professional foul is one. The question comes down to whether the ref gave it for being dangerous or for being a professional foul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrytheb Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said: The question comes down to whether the ref gave it for being dangerous or for being a professional foul. Yeah that's actually what will determine how many games he gets. Expect it to be 3 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonM88 Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said: If he doesn't make it then Scowen is through on Steele, about as clear a professional fouls as can be. The question comes down to whether the ref gave it for being dangerous or for being a professional foul. Scraping the barrel there. He’s 40 yards out, on the left touchline. It was given for the nature of the takle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarlBCFC Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 Stonewall red card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 1 minute ago, CarlBCFC said: Stonewall red card. Found Keith Stroud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Engvall's Splinter Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 I too think it’s a red. Off the deck, out of control. If the boots on the other foot, we’d see it as red I’m sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarlBCFC Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 4 minutes ago, hodge said: Found Keith Stroud Can you explain how it isn't a red card? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 At the time it looked rather bad. Seen it on TV...yellow would have sufficed. Hopefully we get it overturned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickolas Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 1 hour ago, cidercity1987 said: In summary: Neutrals who think it's a yellow Phil Thompson Clinton Morrison Colin Murray C5 Commentator International Commentator Gasheads who think it's a yellow Ian Holloway Neutrals who think it's a red Keith Stroud Im sorry i disagree. Keith Stroud was definitely not neutral, he was on QPR’s side!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dastardly and Muttley Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 So Bailey Wright gets hit, falls over and gets a two match ban with his opponent, who raised his arms, getting his card rescinded. Here, Baker dives in with a meaty challenge, Scowen goes for the full tuck jump and roll complete with gasp of pain and grab of the shin, before getting up normally once the card is shown. What’s different between the two? Both Bailey and Scowen were fouled, no doubt. Both Bailey and Scowen made a meal of it, no doubt. Hopefully both Bailey and Scowen will see the same punishment, although that would involve a consistent FA and I can’t imagine that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 Not really sure why everyone is moaning about it? Hardly a horrendous decision. Most refs would give a red card in todays football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrytheb Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 3 minutes ago, KeepUpLino said: You’re not a City fan are you... **** off!!! You're just an angry person person aren't you? You rubbish a post of mine saying it'll be a 3 game ban and then get abusive to someone who thinks it is a red card. Fwiw I think it was a harsh red but Baker gave the ref the opportunity to give it and will have to accept it. I don't believe for a second that city would be able to successfully appeal it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 3 minutes ago, Dastardly and Muttley said: So Bailey Wright gets hit, falls over and gets a two match ban with his opponent, who raised his arms, getting his card rescinded. Here, Baker dives in with a meaty challenge, Scowen goes for the full tuck jump and roll complete with gasp of pain and grab of the shin, before getting up normally once the card is shown. What’s different between the two? Both Bailey and Scowen were fouled, no doubt. Both Bailey and Scowen made a meal of it, no doubt. Hopefully both Bailey and Scowen will see the same punishment, although that would involve a consistent FA and I can’t imagine that. That would be an interesting angle for City to take, did Scowen making a meal of the challenge while holding a body part not directly touched in the challenge (a reason given against Wright) influence the ref into a decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarlBCFC Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 8 minutes ago, KeepUpLino said: You’re not a City fan are you... **** off!!! Well done d*ckhead. Enlighten me with your vast knowledge of the game and it's Laws Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepUpLino Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 1 minute ago, CarlBCFC said: Well done d*ckhead. Enlighten me with your vast knowledge of the game and it's Laws here we go haha... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Red Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 Don't think we're getting that overturned, sadly. Although I do think the system that means that a player gets a 3 game ban for an incident that other referees might well have given a yellow card for without too much complaint needs looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenkibby. Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 What ever we think, and opinions seem 50/50 on red or yellow there is no way the club will appeal the sending off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freezer Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 Well, I thought it was a harsh red, a definite yellow, and if Scowen hadn't have got an Oscar for his reaction then it was a travesty all round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrongagain Posted January 27, 2018 Report Share Posted January 27, 2018 Yellow all day for me, a little late yes, fast and strong yes, studs up no, got the ball perhaps, Oscar winning roll from victim yes - clearly seen from lansdown - beaming smile to physio just before victim got to feet yes! referee not good enough for downs football on sunday - definitely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.