Tom 13804 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 6 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. They only extend it if they think the appeal is 'frivolous', which is usually when teams are trying to delay the start of the ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shackbleep 0 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13804 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Should have probably gone in like this eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giraffidae 0 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 appeal lost bugger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest You FCB Get Out Of Our Club Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shackbleep 0 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. I don't agree like. You can count on one hand the amount of time an additional game ban has been added. Can't convince me that all those appeals that have been upheld is 'almost an admission they know they were wrong to do so'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13804 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Posting smiley's without making a proper point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest You FCB Get Out Of Our Club Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. I don't agree like. You can count on one hand the amount of time an additional game ban has been added. Can't convince me that all those appeals that have been upheld is 'almost an admission they know they were wrong to do so'. There's been loads of examples, and a good few of them getting overturned like that Argentinian full back for Man City last week. Zabaleta that's it. Take Alliadiere when he was at Boro they appealled and he was given an extra game ban it's happened loads of times. Why did Tiote not receive the extra game when so many others have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 19714 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. i haven't heard of that happening before. is it really as high as 80 per cent? it was a stone wall red card if you ask me. don't see it as one with a lot of grey area. i don't think there was ever going to be a chance of them rescinding this one for reasons already discussed in this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shackbleep 0 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I've made a clear point and I'm posting a because I find your suggestion about motive for not extending the ban frankly ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest You FCB Get Out Of Our Club Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. i haven't heard of that happening before. is it really as high as 80 per cent? it was a stone wall red card if you ask me. don't see it as one with a lot of grey area. i don't think there was ever going to be a chance of them rescinding this one for reasons already discussed in this thread No cunts asking you. David Blunkett could see that wasn't a yellow never mind a red, how can it be a red when you doesn't touch the man? He jumped aye, so fuck, his foot hit the ball from the side without even touching the player. If I do a star jump at the five a side should I be sent off cos I jumped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest You FCB Get Out Of Our Club Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I've made a clear point and I'm posting a because I find your suggestion about motive for not extending the ban frankly ridiculous. It's the only explanation imo. They don't know what to do so they'll do fuck all and leave it as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shackbleep 0 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. I don't agree like. You can count on one hand the amount of time an additional game ban has been added. Can't convince me that all those appeals that have been upheld is 'almost an admission they know they were wrong to do so'. There's been loads of examples, and a good few of them getting overturned like that Argentinian full back for Man City last week. Zabaleta that's it. Take Alliadiere when he was at Boro they appealled and he was given an extra game ban it's happened loads of times. Why did Tiote not receive the extra game when so many others have? I didn't see one person claim Zabaleta's red card shouldn't have been overturned. We couldn't even agree about Tiote's amongst a few people on a Newcastle message board. As for the examples, Alliadiere was a well reported one, but there's not been too many others. Can you find some stats to back up the 80% claim? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I think it's just an acceptance there was some debate around it and it was a legitimate reason for appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. i haven't heard of that happening before. is it really as high as 80 per cent? it was a stone wall red card if you ask me. don't see it as one with a lot of grey area. i don't think there was ever going to be a chance of them rescinding this one for reasons already discussed in this thread No cunts asking you. David Blunkett could see that wasn't a yellow never mind a red, how can it be a red when you doesn't touch the man? He jumped aye, so fuck, his foot hit the ball from the side without even touching the player. If I do a star jump at the five a side should I be sent off cos I jumped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shackbleep 0 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Another appeal resulting in an extended ban is Michael Turner at the mackems. Can't think of any more though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13804 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The F.A are about as consistent as a tourrettes sufferer playing scrabble. They are sticking by the ref and they aren't going into it further. They have offered no explanation or reasoning as per usual. They clearly don't care about the incident or the consequences and they simply want it to fade out. Just look at the De Jong challenge, they just stick by the ref and sweep it under the carpet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest You FCB Get Out Of Our Club Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. I don't agree like. You can count on one hand the amount of time an additional game ban has been added. Can't convince me that all those appeals that have been upheld is 'almost an admission they know they were wrong to do so'. There's been loads of examples, and a good few of them getting overturned like that Argentinian full back for Man City last week. Zabaleta that's it. Take Alliadiere when he was at Boro they appealled and he was given an extra game ban it's happened loads of times. Why did Tiote not receive the extra game when so many others have? I didn't see one person claim Zabaleta's red card shouldn't have been overturned. We couldn't even agree about Tiote's amongst a few people on a Newcastle message board. As for the examples, Alliadiere was a well reported one, but there's not been too many others. Can you find some stats to back up the 80% claim? I'm not Happy Face, I'll have a look later, but I bet it's a high percentage. Edited January 11, 2011 by You FCB Get Out Of Our Club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26108 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. I don't agree like. You can count on one hand the amount of time an additional game ban has been added. Can't convince me that all those appeals that have been upheld is 'almost an admission they know they were wrong to do so'. There's been loads of examples, and a good few of them getting overturned like that Argentinian full back for Man City last week. Zabaleta that's it. Take Alliadiere when he was at Boro they appealled and he was given an extra game ban it's happened loads of times. Why did Tiote not receive the extra game when so many others have? The extra game is only added if the appeal is seen as 'frivolous' i.e. the club taking the piss and trying their hand. Obviously the panel thought that we had reason to appeal but still maintained that it was a red card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 19714 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. i haven't heard of that happening before. is it really as high as 80 per cent? it was a stone wall red card if you ask me. don't see it as one with a lot of grey area. i don't think there was ever going to be a chance of them rescinding this one for reasons already discussed in this thread No cunts asking you. David Blunkett could see that wasn't a yellow never mind a red, how can it be a red when you doesn't touch the man? He jumped aye, so fuck, his foot hit the ball from the side without even touching the player. If I do a star jump at the five a side should I be sent off cos I jumped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The F.A are about as consistent as a tourrettes sufferer playing scrabble. They are sticking by the ref and they aren't going into it further. They have offered no explanation or reasoning as per usual. They clearly don't care about the incident or the consequences and they simply want it to fade out. Just look at the De Jong challenge, they just stick by the ref and sweep it under the carpet. I certainly agree about the lack of consistency like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shackbleep 0 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I think it's just an acceptance there was some debate around it and it was a legitimate reason for appeal. Absolutely. The extra game ban was introduced to stop clubs appealing just for the hell of it (which used to happen all the time - nothing ventured, nothing gained). BTW I was unaware that if a player gets a straight red additional times in the season, the ban increases for each incident - i.e. 2nd straight red = 4 game ban, 3rd straight red = 5 game ban. Ouch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 19714 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The fact that the ban hasn't been extended to 4 games is almost an admission they know they are wrong. Jesus I actually agree with Tom. 80% of the time they dish out an extra game now if the appeal fails, the very least it's an admittance of is it's so borderline it was a difficult decision, but deep down they have to support the referee when there are grey areas, which is a fuckin disgrace if you ask me. I don't agree like. You can count on one hand the amount of time an additional game ban has been added. Can't convince me that all those appeals that have been upheld is 'almost an admission they know they were wrong to do so'. There's been loads of examples, and a good few of them getting overturned like that Argentinian full back for Man City last week. Zabaleta that's it. Take Alliadiere when he was at Boro they appealled and he was given an extra game ban it's happened loads of times. Why did Tiote not receive the extra game when so many others have? I didn't see one person claim Zabaleta's red card shouldn't have been overturned. We couldn't even agree about Tiote's amongst a few people on a Newcastle message board. As for the examples, Alliadiere was a well reported one, but there's not been too many others. Can you find some stats to back up the 80% claim? I'm not Happy Face, I'll have a look later, but I bet it's a high percentage. 80 per cent surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 8862 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The F.A are about as consistent as a tourrettes sufferer playing scrabble. They are sticking by the ref and they aren't going into it further. They have offered no explanation or reasoning as per usual. They clearly don't care about the incident or the consequences and they simply want it to fade out. Just look at the De Jong challenge, they just stick by the ref and sweep it under the carpet. Tbf the incidents where a decision of a referee can get rescinded are rather few. It foremost depends on what the referee notes in his reports. The lack of explanations isn't helping in making the process of decision making very transparent though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now