cheshire_red Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Means he won't miss games against Play off contenders Preston and Burnley. Not that he is much cop but gets the odd goal! Gunn still saying he got a touch on the ball. Idiot doesn't appreciate it doesn't matter if the challenge brings a player down from behind anyways. It's not just some fans who don't know the Laws of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Wait. So, if the sending off was overturned, which it was, does that mean the penalty itself was questionable? Not that it can be changed or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_BCFC Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Wait. So, if the sending off was overturned, which it was, does that mean the penalty itself was questionable? Not that it can be changed or anything. Final score has been adjusted. 2-1 them as they should have had a penalty for the Orr challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Ludicrous decision by the FA. This now means in effect that any player who brings someone down when clear on goal cannot be sent off if he gets his little toe on the ball (which Docherty didn't anyway in my view). If any consequent penalty was missed the offending side would have gained a double advantage. If I was a referee I would despair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff65 Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Same FA that slaps SWP with a 3 match ban when he probably only deserves 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edson Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Ludicrous decision by the FA. This now means in effect that any player who brings someone down when clear on goal cannot be sent off if he gets his little toe on the ball (which Docherty didn't anyway in my view). If any consequent penalty was missed the offending side would have gained a double advantage. If I was a referee I would despair. Indeed. The FA rolls out the 'Respect' campaign, doesn't implement it in any way, shape or form and then looks to undermine the officials by overturning perfectly acceptable decisons. If referees went on strike, I wouldn't blame them in the slightest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red_Mat Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Ludicrous decision by the FA. This now means in effect that any player who brings someone down when clear on goal cannot be sent off if he gets his little toe on the ball (which Docherty didn't anyway in my view). If any consequent penalty was missed the offending side would have gained a double advantage. If I was a referee I would despair. There is no such law. The concept of an automatic red card for anyone who brings someone down when through on goal only exists in the wet dreams of commentators such as Clive Tyldsley. That doesn't mean it's not a penalty; it can still be a foul, without necessarily being a sending off. It's identical in any area of the pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 There is no such law. The concept of an automatic red card for anyone who brings someone down when through on goal only exists in the wet dreams of commentators such as Clive Tyldsley. That doesn't mean it's not a penalty; it can still be a foul, without necessarily being a sending off. It's identical in any area of the pitch. Indeed but custom and practice tend to apply in sport, as in common law. In other words it has become the accepted norm (triggered originally I believe by Willie Young bringing Paul Allen down when clean through in a Cup Final and staying on the field, and in reaction to the general cynicism that had come into the game and which favoured defenders over forwards). A sending off has therefore become the widely accepted and justified consequence of such an offence, even if not mandated by the laws. Cases like this tend to undermine that principle and hence any referee who makes such a decision IMO. The risk is that other clubs will follow suit in appealing and referees will become reluctant to issue cards for fear of their being overturned; again IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesM Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingswood red Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 There is no such law. The concept of an automatic red card for anyone who brings someone down when through on goal only exists in the wet dreams of commentators such as Clive Tyldsley. That doesn't mean it's not a penalty; it can still be a foul, without necessarily being a sending off. It's identical in any area of the pitch. If you take the trouble to follow the link to Law 12 page 36, you may change your mind. http://www.thefa.com/NR/rdonlyres/095F9568...TheGame0809.pdf edit: fatman beat me to it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesM Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 What narks me about the FA is: they will happily use video replays to prove a referee wrong after the fact, but seem to be reluctant to lobby FIFA to allow video replays during a game to avoid these nonsensical situations. and they are happy to rescind a red card where, in their opinion, the ref sees an incident and get's it wrong (doherty), they're also quite willing to go back and retrospectively suspend a player when the ref doesn't see an incident (wright-phillips). yet when a ref sees an incident and still gets it wrong, they can't/wont go back and issue red card....im thinking about Nadir Belhadj and Jose Bosingwa here as recent examples of violent conduct that have only received cautions (I'm not sure Bosingwa was even cautioned?!!). Referee's need as much support as it's possible to give. Nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red_Mat Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesM Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 The point still remains: this was not necessarily an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. That is not a black and white issue and is left to the interpretation of the referee. Without trying to sound facetious......Adebola was 15 yards away from the centre of the goal with only the keeper to beat....if that's not an 'obvious goal-scoring opportunity' then I must not understand football at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Percy Parrot Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Surely it was either a foul and a red card or nothing? If the challenge was fair then nothing - if he went through Adebola before touching the ball or failed to get any contact then it was a pen and a red card. When I saw it on World I thought that Doherty got the ball. The ball moved to the right and I don't think it was Dele's touch. So I guess the critical thing is whether he tripped or impeded Dele before he got the ball. I'm not so sure he did. If he touched the ball and then Adebola went over his leg then as far as I'm concerned it shouldn't be a penalty. It's a contact sport. Sure if you go through someone to get the ball then it's a foul but if you get the ball and happen to knock in to the player while doing so it's fair. I can not slow the footage down enough to see clearly whether it was totally clean or not but the FA must think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Eamer Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 when a ref sees an incident and still gets it wrong, they can't/wont go back and issue red card....I'm thinking about Nadir Belhadj and Jose Bosingwa here as recent examples of violent conduct that have only received cautions (I'm not sure Bosingwa was even cautioned?!!). Just like Jermaine Beckford last night. He got a yellow for giving an elbow to Millwall's Goalkeeper where that should be a red so they will forget about it when he should be given a three game ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Portland Bill Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Same FA that slaps SWP with a 3 match ban when he probably only deserves 1. South Wales Police... Banned!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingswood red Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 The point still remains: this was not necessarily an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. That is not a black and white issue and is left to the interpretation of the referee. It was to the referee at the time, thats why he sent the player off and gave a penalty. Stop squirming and just accept you were wrong and email Clive Tyldsley (re. post 7) with an apologly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4eveREDDy Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 What narks me about the FA is: they will happily use video replays to prove a referee wrong after the fact, but seem to be reluctant to lobby FIFA to allow video replays during a game to avoid these nonsensical situations. and they are happy to rescind a red card where, in their opinion, the ref sees an incident and get's it wrong (doherty), they're also quite willing to go back and retrospectively suspend a player when the ref doesn't see an incident (wright-phillips). yet when a ref sees an incident and still gets it wrong, they can't/wont go back and issue red card....I'm thinking about Nadir Belhadj and Jose Bosingwa here as recent examples of violent conduct that have only received cautions (I'm not sure Bosingwa was even cautioned?!!). Referee's need as much support as it's possible to give. Nonsense. I bet they do bugger all about Beckfords thuggery the other night against millwall, how he stayed on god only knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the frampton balti Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 Surely it was either a foul and a red card or nothing? If the challenge was fair then nothing - if he went through Adebola before touching the ball or failed to get any contact then it was a pen and a red card. When I saw it on World I thought that Doherty got the ball. The ball moved to the right and I don't think it was Dele's touch. So I guess the critical thing is whether he tripped or impeded Dele before he got the ball. I'm not so sure he did. If he touched the ball and then Adebola went over his leg then as far as I'm concerned it shouldn't be a penalty. It's a contact sport. Sure if you go through someone to get the ball then it's a foul but if you get the ball and happen to knock in to the player while doing so it's fair. I can not slow the footage down enough to see clearly whether it was totally clean or not but the FA must think so. I ,for one, am satisfied that doherty got the ball before the player .Reckless in todays modern blousey game.....Perhaps. Certainly would have gone down as a fantastic tackle in 1974. As mentioned before its a tackle that i myself would have been proud of. The penalty would have been given on most occasions. However looking back with hindsight it is understandable that the card has been withdrawn. As for Dele being 15 yards clear! I cant see how any contact could have been made at all at that distance. I fear some are in denial! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edson Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 I ,for one, am satisfied that doherty got the ball before the player .Reckless in todays modern blousey game.....Perhaps. Certainly would have gone down as a fantastic tackle in 1974. As mentioned before its a tackle that i myself would have been proud of. The penalty would have been given on most occasions. However looking back with hindsight it is understandable that the card has been withdrawn. As for Dele being 15 yards clear! I cant see how any contact could have been made at all at that distance. I fear some are in denial! The post you're referring to says he was 15 yards from the centre of goal, not 15 yards clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the frampton balti Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 The post you're referring to says he was 15 yards from the centre of goal, not 15 yards clear. Apologies to fatman The point being that this incident is obviously not as clearcut as is being made out by many on here. I'm sure that the card has been rescinded using better quality video evidence to substantiate, than we have access to. It seems a shame that the FA can not explain the decision with reference to the rules.Was ,for instance this decision made on the sole basis that the defender played the ball before the player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edson Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 Apologies to fatman The point being that this incident is obviously not as clearcut as is being made out by many on here. I'm sure that the card has been rescinded using better quality video evidence to substantiate, than we have access to. It seems a shame that the FA can not explain the decision with reference to the rules.Was ,for instance this decision made on the sole basis that the defender played the ball before the player. You're mistaking the FA for an organisation that gives a toss. I did that once, but have since realised the error of my ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norwichrobin Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 doherty got the ball, never.....are people implying as mr gunn is that ade dived??? norwich allegedly have just commented "it wasnt fair saturday the grass was too green for us and the ball had too much air in it thats just blatant cheating on bristol citys part, also at several points during the game their players actually tried to tackle us, and thats just not on. We have the divine right to win at home and if not we will scream and scream until were sick. "Its true mr ferguson was my mentor at aberdeen but he has not influenced my managerial stlye in the slightest, i must say though that bristol city cheated, everyone hates me, and the ref although my mate was always against me from birth. (Mods this is just in good humour) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 If Norwich get into a victim mentality it will work against their attempt to avoid relegation. Once players and Managers start to blame everybody else for their misfortune and cease to take responsibility they are one step away from believing there is nothing they can do and just giving up. Not a state of mind Gary would allow I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Nose Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 I bet they do bugger all about Beckfords thuggery the other night against millwall, how he stayed on god only knows. Looks as so he's going to face a three match ban.. BBC Football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chivs Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 You're mistaking the FA for an organisation that gives a toss. I did that once, but have since realised the error of my ways. You sound a little bitter. Do you want to get something off your chest? In the meantime, consider a club secretary who drives 40 miles to the local FA in the early evening to represent his club against a decision taken by the League. And then being told that the League couldn't find anyone to represent them so the hearing would have to be rearranged. And being told that he couldn't be contacted to inform him the hearing was postponed despite the FA having his telephone number. And then, in a fury, on his way home writing off his car in a particularly bendy bit of road. THEN you could be justified in being bitter. Not that I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edson Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 You sound a little bitter. Do you want to get something off your chest? In the meantime, consider a club secretary who drives 40 miles to the local FA in the early evening to represent his club against a decision taken by the League. And then being told that the League couldn't find anyone to represent them so the hearing would have to be rearranged. And being told that he couldn't be contacted to inform him the hearing was postponed despite the FA having his telephone number. And then, in a fury, on his way home writing off his car in a particularly bendy bit of road. THEN you could be justified in being bitter. Not that I am. My grievance is more protracted and involves less cars. Suffice to say, after 5 years of coaching and running a junior football club, I have come to the end of my tether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 The point still remains: this was not necessarily an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. That is not a black and white issue and is left to the interpretation of the referee. Babel is in for a tough time from now on as defenders can bring him down knowing they can never be sent off. Having seen his goal line miss at Portsmouth, it would be difficult to classify any chance coming his way as an obvious goalscoring opprtunity in future! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foghornred Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesM Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 Looks as so he's going to face a three match ban.. BBC Football "The FA has been advised by the match referee that Jermaine Beckford was cautioned for a pushing incident that occurred prior to the incident involving Millwall's David Forde." That's convenient! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.