Joshua King

Must admit I didn't really see that properly at the time, but it was a dangerous and uncontrolled challenge for sure. On another day could easily have seen red. Anywhere else on the pitch that's a def sending off.
 
redharry - 31/10/2016 08:35

Must admit I didn't really see that properly at the time, but it was a dangerous and uncontrolled challenge for sure. On another day could easily have seen red. Anywhere else on the pitch that's a def sending off.
Click to expand...

Anywhere else but on a football pitch, an unprovoked attack might land the perpetrator at least five years in chokey.


 
Andymc - 31/10/2016 09:04

So if the FA can punish Sissoko after the game , why will Valdes get away with dangerous play?
Click to expand...

the FA will only take action if the ref says he did not see it. If he says he saw it and thought it was O.K. the FA will not investigate. I don't think the FA will even ask the question.
 
redharry - 31/10/2016 09:07

Andymc - 31/10/2016 09:04

So if the FA can punish Sissoko after the game , why will Valdes get away with dangerous play?
Click to expand...

the FA will only take action if the ref says he did not see it. If he says he saw it and thought it was O.K. the FA will not investigate. I don't think the FA will even ask the question.
Click to expand...

The Twitter clip clearly shows the ref just to the right of the keeper and facing the play so he must have seen it, making the whole thing even more bizarre.

At the game I did shout for a penalty (as you do) more in hope but when seeing that replay I can't understand how it isn't dangerous play!
 
the ref seemed quite keen to go against his "whistle happy" image and let quite a lot of stuff go on the day (rightly or wrongly)
 
redharry - 31/10/2016 09:07

Andymc - 31/10/2016 09:04

So if the FA can punish Sissoko after the game , why will Valdes get away with dangerous play?
Click to expand...

the FA will only take action if the ref says he did not see it. If he says he saw it and thought it was O.K. the FA will not investigate. I don't think the FA will even ask the question.
Click to expand...

Did the ref say he didn't see the Sissoko one then? He was right in front of it and thought he had a chat with the lino about it at the time.
 
ForbiddenFruit - 31/10/2016 09:51

redharry - 31/10/2016 09:07

Andymc - 31/10/2016 09:04

So if the FA can punish Sissoko after the game , why will Valdes get away with dangerous play?
Click to expand...

the FA will only take action if the ref says he did not see it. If he says he saw it and thought it was O.K. the FA will not investigate. I don't think the FA will even ask the question.
Click to expand...

Did the ref say he didn't see the Sissoko one then? He was right in front of it and thought he had a chat with the lino about it at the time.
Click to expand...

As I understand it, It's all about whether the ref includes (or chooses not to include) the incident in his written match report afterwards. Not included = the FA can take retrospective action.

With Sissoko I can only imagine the ref realised he dropped a bollock so choose not to include it knowing it would get correctly dealt with after the fact at least.

Funny how we keep being on the end of these massive game changing lapses in a referee's vision or bottle. Both refs well placed looking directly at both incidents.
 
Dermott Gallagher says clear pen & red card...

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/10639689/ref-watch-ander-herrera-should-not-have-seen-red-but-penalty-appeals-were-right
 
DERMOT SAYS: I'm in the minority here. I saw this on Saturday and my immediate reaction was 'penalty'. I also think it was a red card because I think it's serious foul play. The goalkeeper cannot possibly play that ball and his knee is up and hits him high up. I think it's minimum a penalty and a red card.
Clear cut then, his minimum is also the maximum :hihi:
 
bondsnemesis - 31/10/2016 15:40

DERMOT SAYS: I'm in the minority here. I saw this on Saturday and my immediate reaction was 'penalty'. I also think it was a red card because I think it's serious foul play. The goalkeeper cannot possibly play that ball and his knee is up and hits him high up. I think it's minimum a penalty and a red card.
Clear cut then, his minimum is also the maximum :hihi:
Click to expand...

I think he means he should possibly also get an extended ban
 
More comment on it here saying it should have been a penalty, although probably only a yellow:

http://www.squawka.com/news/man-utd-shouldve-had-a-penalty-v-burnley-and-ten-other-pl-refereeing-decisions-rated/813830

Seems like pretty much everyone thinks it should have been a penalty. I haven't seen anywhere that has talked about it that had a different opinion. Apart from the Boro forum... and yet, even there...
 
Interesting to see that Howe was none committal on whether it should have been a penalty.

What with Arter accepting Sissoko's apology after the game against Spurs, we're certainly playing the non controversial nice guy role.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;