The Official Chelsea Thread [Vol 2]
Discussion
trackdemon said:
addey said:
trackdemon said:
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a comedian in the room! 
What's so funny? Barnes could have avoided following through into Matic and Costa could have avoided landing on Skyrtl. What's the difference?
). I made no reference to the severity of the incidents but was saying that the way in which they occurred are very similar. Ashley Barnes decided to 'leave his leg in' on the follow through, in other words he made a premeditated decision to contact Matic. A nasty, dangerous thing to do. Costa jumped over Skrtel and also made a premeditated decision to contact the player via a "stamp". A nasty, dangerous thing to do. They were both consciously made decisions with intent to hurt (I assume) which could have easily been avoided. Of course the Matic one looks much worse as contact is made when Matic's foot is grounded - if his leg had been in the air upon contact then we wouldn't be discussing this now and Matic wouldn't be facing a 2 match ban. Likewise the Costa one could have been much worse if he'd landed in Skrtel's groin and caused him to lose a testicle 
Anyway, the overall point I was probably trying to make is something to do with indignant fans, whinging managers and double-standards over 'similar' incidents So moaning like a menstrual school girl does work then. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31613184
ascayman said:
So moaning like a menstrual school girl does work then. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31613184
Opens up a whole new can of worms just to appease Roman & Jose.
Spuds play tonight. Fingers crossed for minor injuries to Eriksson, Kane and Lloris. Nothing serious, just a week out. Oh, and a French air traffic controllers strike delaying their return by about 18 hours. And a heavy defeat to sap their confidence.
That aside, I wish them all the best.
That aside, I wish them all the best.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Spuds play tonight. Fingers crossed for minor injuries to Eriksson, Kane and Lloris. Nothing serious, just a week out. Oh, and a French air traffic controllers strike delaying their return by about 18 hours. And a heavy defeat to sap their confidence.
That aside, I wish them all the best.
On a scale of one to Gascoigne, how pissed are you?That aside, I wish them all the best.
The game is tomorrow and it's in Italy.
Cie said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Spuds play tonight. Fingers crossed for minor injuries to Eriksson, Kane and Lloris. Nothing serious, just a week out. Oh, and a French air traffic controllers strike delaying their return by about 18 hours. And a heavy defeat to sap their confidence.
That aside, I wish them all the best.
On a scale of one to Gascoigne, how pissed are you?That aside, I wish them all the best.
The game is tomorrow and it's in Italy.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Cie said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Spuds play tonight. Fingers crossed for minor injuries to Eriksson, Kane and Lloris. Nothing serious, just a week out. Oh, and a French air traffic controllers strike delaying their return by about 18 hours. And a heavy defeat to sap their confidence.
That aside, I wish them all the best.
On a scale of one to Gascoigne, how pissed are you?That aside, I wish them all the best.
The game is tomorrow and it's in Italy.
ManFromDelmonte said:
How does it? All they are saying is that, yes it was a red card, but the punishment has been reduced due to mitigating circumstances. Very common practice in the legal world.
Well of course it does , every time a player gets a 3 match ban for a red card for retaliating they will ask for their ban to be reduced for mitigating circumstances. Or do you think it is just because this tackle is the worst in the history of the English game ?It's going to happen.
Black can man said:
ManFromDelmonte said:
How does it? All they are saying is that, yes it was a red card, but the punishment has been reduced due to mitigating circumstances. Very common practice in the legal world.
Well of course it does , every time a player gets a 3 match ban for a red card for retaliating they will ask for their ban to be reduced for mitigating circumstances. Or do you think it is just because this tackle is the worst in the history of the English game ?It's going to happen.
If there genuinely are mitigating circumstances then the ban should be reduced. i.e. If Ivanovich had pushed Suarez after the bite, I think it would be fair that he was sent off but served less than the 3 match ban.
ManFromDelmonte said:
So you think clubs will be appealing red cards for professional fouls or deliberate hand-balls etc.? Seems unlikely, especially when flippant appeals can result in a longer ban being applied.
If there genuinely are mitigating circumstances then the ban should be reduced. i.e. If Ivanovich had pushed Suarez after the bite, I think it would be fair that he was sent off but served less than the 3 match ban.
So who decides the genuine mitigating circumstances ? If there genuinely are mitigating circumstances then the ban should be reduced. i.e. If Ivanovich had pushed Suarez after the bite, I think it would be fair that he was sent off but served less than the 3 match ban.
No. Read what i wrote, When a player receives a 3 match ban for a red card for retaliation then his club will appeal & try & get the ban reduced in future because of this appeal.
You can't just change the rules willy nilly, A red cad is a red card & a 3 match ban is a 3 match ban unless of course you play for certain teams it seems, i bet Barnes would have not got away with this if it was the other way round.
We are not going to agree so it's pointless discussing,
good day to you sir.
Black can man said:
So who decides the genuine mitigating circumstances ?
No. Read what i wrote, When a player receives a 3 match ban for a red card for retaliation then his club will appeal & try & get the ban reduced in future because of this appeal.
You can't just change the rules willy nilly, A red cad is a red card & a 3 match ban is a 3 match ban unless of course you play for certain teams it seems, i bet Barnes would have not got away with this if it was the other way round.
We are not going to agree so it's pointless discussing,
good day to you sir.
Fair enough, you know what they say about arguing on the internet.No. Read what i wrote, When a player receives a 3 match ban for a red card for retaliation then his club will appeal & try & get the ban reduced in future because of this appeal.
You can't just change the rules willy nilly, A red cad is a red card & a 3 match ban is a 3 match ban unless of course you play for certain teams it seems, i bet Barnes would have not got away with this if it was the other way round.
We are not going to agree so it's pointless discussing,
good day to you sir.
Does anyone know what the rules are with regard to bans and mitigating circumstances? I would be surprised to find that what happened here is a change of the rules with no precedent.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff