Super Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Clearly Wade is pulled back.A bit inconclusive after though.Hopefully enough to win the appeal. Not any evidence to overturn the decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welcome To The Jungle Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 If you are running forward and are then suddenly yanked back you would bend your knees and your head would angle backwards. You can see the guy's hands on Wade pulling him. But bending your knees and then straightening them are two movements. It is just my opinion but for me he is a silly boy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Journalist Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Looked like they were both niggling at each other to me. Should Wade know better? Probably, but you can't be sending players off for that two minutes into a match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Looked like they were both niggling at each other to me. Should Wade know better? Probably, but you can't be sending players off for that two minutes into a match. The time is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roe Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Awful decision. How people are trying to justify that that deserves a 4 match ban is mental to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bat Fastard Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 If the Swindon player had not pulled him back then there would have been no incident. Wade appears simply to be trying to regain his balance - as he is walking away - he cannot see the chap advancing on him to grab him by the shoulders. This has all the hallmarks of a deliberate con - and the gullible officials fell for it. The perpetrator should get a 5 match ban for cheating and the red card MUST be overturned! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Journalist Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 The time is irrelevant. In relation to rules being applied, of course. The point, perhaps poorly made, is that given that incident surely cannot constitute violent conduct, it's not like you have two players who've been persistently fouling and niggling away at each other for 20 minutes and have received warnings for it. In my opinion, the referee has been a little over excited and his decision lacked both calmness and common sense. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Between heaven and hell Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 My take on it as it happened was foul on Elliot initially because of a high arm by the Swindon player, then another foul on Elliot as he was pulled back by the Swindon player (arms on shoulders) then retaliation by our club captain by throwing his head backwards. Whether he made much contact only two people will know but the Swindon chap obviously got what he wanted judging by their players reaction in other photos shown on other threads. My first thought was as it happened oh Christ he's off and first thoughts are never usually to far out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Looks like from the angle the linesman had he would have missed the Swindle players armswing and grab on Elliott before subsequently hitting the ground.. Reckon the lino flagged for what he thinks he saw but not what he almost certainly missed. We can see something he couldn't and, maybe, maybe he saw something we couldnt..its only split seconds but vital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahatma Coate Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Thanks... so near yet so far, Swindon play/er/actor definitely not 'innocent' -if only we could see what happens next - hmmm It's been a few years since I was a grade 1 ref ( and never at anything like this level ) and remember the decision has to be made in real time. The Swindon player pulled Elliot backwards, that's a foul but probably not violent conduct. Elliot could not balance and put his arm out. That's the laws of physics (Jim), again not violent conduct. Correct decision free kick to City. Frankly Elliot could easily have gone over after the first challenge, but even though that one was robust it was not a yellow card in my opinion. For the simulation afterwards the Swindon player should have received a yellow card. That's after half a dozen reviews, would I have done that in real time 20 odd years ago, no idea. Referee Drysdale got it wrong this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chivs Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 A bit inconclusive. A shame the "headbutt" is just off camera. But it looks a debatable red so I'm surprised the ref gave it. For me though, what is quite clear, is the forearm smash by the Swindon defender just before the "incident". And then the defender dragging back Wade by the shoulders. How did the referee/linesman miss that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GodEmperor Palpatine Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 I take it Jack Stephens was hospitalized after such a vicious assault by Wadey... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Wade Elliott did nothing. Only elbow given is by the Swindon player at the very start of "the clash". At the crucial moment the Swindon players is over Eliotts right shoulder and from the pictures you can spot the position of Wades right arm continiously while he is tracking back. In fact if you watch it pic by pic you can even spot his left hand. No way he can have elbowed their player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 A bit inconclusive. A shame the "headbutt" is just off camera. But it looks a debatable red so I'm surprised the ref gave it. For me though, what is quite clear, is the forearm smash by the Swindon defender just before the "incident". And then the defender dragging back Wade by the shoulders. How did the referee/linesman miss that? Unfortunately not a chance of winning an appeal. As you said....incident is just off of camera, there fore inconclusive. It was the linesmans call....so they will go with what he saw. Yes Wade was fouled at least twice, and I agree....I dont understand how these were missed?....but retaliation is a red card offence, so we are royally screwed. Wade cost us the game yesterday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 It's been a few years since I was a grade 1 ref ( and never at anything like this level ) and remember the decision has to be made in real time. The Swindon player pulled Elliot backwards, that's a foul but probably not violent conduct. Elliot could not balance and put his arm out. That's the laws of physics (Jim), again not violent conduct. Correct decision free kick to City. Frankly Elliot could easily have gone over after the first challenge, but even though that one was robust it was not a yellow card in my opinion. For the simulation afterwards the Swindon player should have received a yellow card. That's after half a dozen reviews, would I have done that in real time 20 odd years ago, no idea. Referee Drysdale got it wrong this time. Simulation. Another word for cheating. Cheating is rewarded with a yellow. The game is a nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 ....maybe there's a grassy knoll 'Zapruder'/ Kennedy' like bit of footage out there somewhere that shows us a bit more... If not I don't think the Sky clip alone will be conclusive enough to win an appeal decision. The Swindon player could've been shot by a sniper from a porta-loo for all we know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderJar Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 The rules are vague but in FA Law 5 the referee is advised to take into consideration "the atmosphere of the match" which at 45 seconds into the game he clearly did notfile:///home/chronos/u-163364726a5b95eecb8f16106f90aab35c263f3e/Downloads/law-5---interpretation-of-the-laws-of-the-game-2014-15%20(1).pdfIt is also worth noting that before yesterday's game City had the lowest number of disciplinary points against them of any team in League One this season, which would surely support any appeal if lodged?http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/fairplay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahatma Coate Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Simulation. Another word for cheating. Cheating is rewarded with a yellow. The game is a nonsense. Yes, it is, 100% nonsense and corrupt to the core. All caused by the stupid sums of money in the game and the stupid antics of primate donnae given too much air time by the idiot box week after week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Unfortunately not a chance of winning an appeal. As you said....incident is just off of camera, there fore inconclusive. It was the linesmans call....so they will go with what he saw. Yes Wade was fouled at least twice, and I agree....I dont understand how these were missed?....but retaliation is a red card offence, so we are royally screwed. Wade cost us the game yesterday He DIDN'T FRACKING RETALIATE. He was pulled back and the Swindon player took a dive as Wade's head came back. Look at the fracking video!!! With friends like you, who needs enemies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 I take it Jack Stephens was hospitalized after such a vicious assault by Wadey... Well, he might have hurt himself celebrating. Planned move and Swindle should be ashamed of themselves. They won't of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashtonphil Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Just seen it and whilst the incident is a little off camera. I think there is enough of a view to see that Elliot did not headbutt the player and that he was pulled back, as well as elbowed, and kicked... Never in a million years was that a red card. I've been a qualifed referee for more years than I care to remember. if that is worth anything in this debate The ref didn't see it. It appears that the linesman communicated via the headset and told him what he thought he saw.... I think there is grounds for appeal but as I said before, that doesn't give us our unbeaten record back does it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahatma Coate Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Sorry Mr Cooper Junior, you are a sad impersonation of your father, who never to the best of my knowledge, ever sent a team out to do that. Not exactly a chip off the old block is he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderJar Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 There is no headbutt there, it is exactly as Wilbs describes it in his YouTube video. They've done us over by cheating, simple as that. If that's the only way they could have beaten us, let them have it, pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazooka Joe Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Mark Cooper on the red card: I haven't seen it yet. I know as soon as it happened the official was saying "definite red card" down his microphone. Once I heard that I thought he might be in trouble. Yeh, the official was referring to the Swindumb guy's challenge on Elliot. Otherwise, it's more likely that Cooper himself was the one who said "definite red card" to the official. What goes round comes round. I'd like to see 11 of our lot playing 10 of theirs for 87 minutes in the return game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 He DIDN'T FRACKING RETALIATE. He was pulled back and the Swindon player took a dive as Wade's head came back. Look at the fracking video!!! With friends like you, who needs enemies? I looked at the video. The incident is not clear and is pretty much off camera. Certainly not enough to win an appeal. You cannot see clearly what he does or doesnt do The linesman had a clear line of sight....they will rule in his favour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manon Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 Well that decision was actually a lot worse than I was expecting. Disgraceful. Don't know if anyone has mentioned this already - can't be arsed to read every post - but apart from the fact that elliot is probably fouled twice already in the lead up to the main incident, it looks to me as though elliot only pulls up suddenly as his shirt becomes right around his neck, which is a completely natural reaction. You stop quickly if your windpipe becomes restricted. Hard to tell from that footage whether the swindon lad actually pulls his shirt or just his shoulder, but that's what it looks like to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 I looked at the video. The incident is not clear and is pretty much off camera. Certainly not enough to win an appeal. You cannot see clearly what he does or doesnt do The linesman had a clear line of sight....they will rule in his favour But you were happy to blame Wade on that evidence. I quote "retaliation is a red card offence, so we are royally screwed. Wade cost us the game yesterday" MORON! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 So I've watched it multiple times and it's a terrible call on multiple levels! Breaking it down: Stephans forearmed/elbowed Elliott Elliott says something to Stephans Stephans grabs Elliott with both arms and physically pulls him back off of the ball Stephans then goes to ground and rolls around like he's taken a punch Looking at that Stephans should have been booked for the initial challenge and we should have had a free kick. If the referee chooses to do nothing you can understand Elliott being annoyed and saying something (which arguably could be what caused the reaction from Stephans) but at no point should Stephans handle Elliott off of the ball, that's a booking too and then when he goes to ground and rolls around that's play acting as obvious as it comes and so all in all he could have been booked three times for his involvement. The worst part is the only thing Elliott did was say something to Stephans which could be a booking depending on what he said but I honestly still don't understand how the decision was so bad other than Stephans making a real meal out of essentially what was a dive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashtonphil Posted November 16, 2014 Report Share Posted November 16, 2014 I looked at the video. The incident is not clear and is pretty much off camera. Certainly not enough to win an appeal. You cannot see clearly what he does or doesnt do The linesman had a clear line of sight....they will rule in his favour Why will they?? They could be brave and take evidence,, overturn the decision and maybe take him off the league list for a while. Then he could go and watch Ed Sheeran with Clattenburg!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.