Jump to content
IGNORED

AS sending off


WayOutWest

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Because that's what we've always called him when he first played and so as to distinguish him from his father. The epithet stuck a la Smudger, The Chief, The Goat, The Wardrobe et al

Surely the name 'Lee' distinguishes him from his father 'Gary'?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if that's a red card we just as well make football a non contact sport.  It's already heading that way I know.

If Semenyo was going in to that challenge at full speed with a straight leg, thus avoiding any chance of injury to himself with no regard for his opponent then red every time.

Just mistimed for me no intent to harm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stephenkibby. said:

Well if that's a red card we just as well make football a non contact sport.  It's already heading that way I know.

If Semenyo was going in to that challenge at full speed with a straight leg, thus avoiding any chance of injury to himself with no regard for his opponent then red every time.

Just mistimed for me no intent to harm.

It's not even mistimed. He won the ball and Huddlestone kicked the bottom of Semenyo's boot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LJ's reasoning was:

 

Quote

 

Did you contest Antoine Semenyo's red card in the end from the weekend?

No, we didn't contest it. We were just worried. We looked at it to contest it and we took some advice, but you always worry about the frivolous appeal.

Because if that goes against you then it costs the young lad another game.

Historically, even if it should have been a yellow card, you don't get them, so we decided to protect him for next season.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How I read LJ’s explanation is that the only way a red card is overturned is if there is no offence at all. In this case there is an argument for a yellow card but appeals don’t change red to yellow so an appeal could therefore be termed a frivolous appeal and incur an extra game ban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Johnny Musicworks said:

How I read LJ’s explanation is that the only way a red card is overturned is if there is no offence at all. In this case there is an argument for a yellow card but appeals don’t change red to yellow so an appeal could therefore be termed a frivolous appeal and incur an extra game ban.

WeeLee should know The Laws and will know whether Semenyo was dismissed for an S1 or S2 offence. An appeal would not seek to demonstrate 'no offence' took place rather the offence didn't fall into the category listed in the official's match report. In which case they've reviewed it and concluded it was either SFP or Violent Conduct ( I'm assuming the former,) and to appeal against such would be frivolous. - much as we all knew would happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

WeeLee should know The Laws and will know whether Semenyo was dismissed for an S1 or S2 offence. An appeal would not seek to demonstrate 'no offence' took place rather the offence didn't fall into the category listed in the official's match report. In which case they've reviewed it and concluded it was either SFP or Violent Conduct ( I'm assuming the former,) and to appeal against such would be frivolous. - much as we all knew would happen.

Excuse my ignorance, but SFP? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

WeeLee should know The Laws and will know whether Semenyo was dismissed for an S1 or S2 offence. An appeal would not seek to demonstrate 'no offence' took place rather the offence didn't fall into the category listed in the official's match report. In which case they've reviewed it and concluded it was either SFP or Violent Conduct ( I'm assuming the former,) and to appeal against such would be frivolous. - much as we all knew would happen.

 

7 minutes ago, JBFC II said:

Excuse my ignorance, but SFP? 

Serious foul play I think.

Unsure Semenyo is guilty of a straight red card offence here though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

 

Serious foul play I think.

Unsure Semenyo is guilty of a straight red card offence here though.

Thanks all. 

I don’t think that tackle shows serious foul play though, although I’m not a qualified referee so my opinion is probably slightly rose tinted...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JBFC II said:

Excuse my ignorance, but SFP? 

Serious Foul Play (S1) the alternate to Violent Conduct (S2)  and both straight reds - distinction being the latter also occurs when the ball or offender is not in play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point being if there was any doubt it wasn't SFP why not appeal at risk it's four not 3 games missed? The lad is highly unlikely to start at the begining of next season so not taking a chance rather than serving out the ban this year when we might need him would be odd.

Hopefully we've simply told him to learn from what looks to have been an impulsive not premeditated mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Point being if there was any doubt it wasn't SFP why not appeal at risk it's four not 3 games missed? The lad is highly unlikely to start at the begining of next season so not taking a chance rather than serving out the ban this year when we might need him would be odd.

Hopefully we've simply told him to learn from what looks to have been an impulsive not premeditated mistake.

Maybe LJ has calculated that he might want Semenyo for the play off final to keep SL sweet, especially if he scores the winning goal?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...