Mags are to appeal both sending off...

  • Thread starter Deleted member 6830
  • Start date

Status
Not open for further replies.
Surprised Shelvey one has been overturned. He had a couple goes at him kicking out, and he didn't seem to surprised when the red came out. Dummett one I can understand, could be seen as a push in the back, but the other lad was already on his way down.

Have they successfully appealed to let Ciaran Clark's goal stand and give them a penalty for the early foul on him too?

2-2 at the moment, penalty to be taken at a later date.
 
Last edited:
Just kicked out without making contact didn't he ?

Hand to out his hands on someone? It'd a contact sport and it was absolutely minimal contact.

Just seen it confirmed. Absolutely right decision. Both overturned.

So as long as you miss the opponent it makes it OK to try and kick people?
 
Shelvey kicked an opponent on the ground, of course it's a red.

Whether or not Lansbury got or deserved one doesn't alter that ..... all of the rest is irrelevant.

Dummet is a clumsy lad who may or may not have pushed the lad deliberately so it's a matter of opinion.

Thing is, the way you've phrased that paints an entirely different picture to reality. Shelvey didn't boot some poor prone player like Shearer did. They were both on the ground, legs tangled, and in kicking to get free, Shelvey doesn't make contact with Lansbury.

Now, seeing as it's been rescinded, it appears the FA agrees with me. ;)

Got to have made an attempt to play the ball
Nope, for it to be a red it has to be clear that no attempt was made to win the ball. Subtle but significant difference.
 
Thing is, the way you've phrased that paints an entirely different picture to reality. Shelvey didn't boot some poor prone player like Shearer did. They were both on the ground, legs tangled, and in kicking to get free, Shelvey doesn't make contact with Lansbury.

Now, seeing as it's been rescinded, it appears the FA agrees with me. ;)


Nope, for it to be a red it has to be clear that no attempt was made to win the ball. Subtle but significant difference.

He could have killed him !



 
Thing is, the way you've phrased that paints an entirely different picture to reality. Shelvey didn't boot some poor prone player like Shearer did. They were both on the ground, legs tangled, and in kicking to get free, Shelvey doesn't make contact with Lansbury.

Now, seeing as it's been rescinded, it appears the FA agrees with me. ;)


Nope, for it to be a red it has to be clear that no attempt was made to win the ball. Subtle but significant difference.
So for it not to be a red there must have been an attempt to play the ball?
 
Thing is, the way you've phrased that paints an entirely different picture to reality. Shelvey didn't boot some poor prone player like Shearer did. They were both on the ground, legs tangled, and in kicking to get free, Shelvey doesn't make contact with Lansbury.

Now, seeing as it's been rescinded, it appears the FA agrees with me. ;)


Nope, for it to be a red it has to be clear that no attempt was made to win the ball. Subtle but significant difference.

The FA decided West Ham didn't cheat enough over Tevez to have points deducted but they fkn did:evil:
 
I disagree with those decisions to be honest.
Even if Shelvey didn't make contact he attempted to strike an opponent.


Then Dummett comes from behind and knocks Lansbury over without making an attempt for the ball.
 
So for it not to be a red there must have been an attempt to play the ball?
...
Nope. For it to be a red it has to be clear that no attempt was made to win the ball.

e.g. It is a red if Dummet pulls Lansbury back by his stupid f***ing hair do, as it's clear that no attempt to win the ball has been made.
It's not a red if (as is the case here) it's not clear that no attempt was made. Because Lansbury is already going down before contact is made and puts his body in such a position to force contact with Dummett, it's not reasonable to state that Dummett wasn't going to make a a genuine attempt for the ball. Lansbury's dive renders that assertion impossible to make, with any credibility.

I'm surprised Shelvey's was overturned and am pretty confident that if the game had happened at 3pm on a Saturday, and as such had missed the widespread criticism that followed it, we wouldn't have seen both rescinded.

The FA decided West Ham didn't cheat enough over Tevez to have points deducted but they fkn did:evil:

So they're due a good call. ;)
 
Thing is, the way you've phrased that paints an entirely different picture to reality. Shelvey didn't boot some poor prone player like Shearer did. They were both on the ground, legs tangled, and in kicking to get free, Shelvey doesn't make contact with Lansbury.

Now, seeing as it's been rescinded, it appears the FA agrees with me. ;)


Nope, for it to be a red it has to be clear that no attempt was made to win the ball. Subtle but significant difference.
Rafa had no complaints that Shelvey was sent off. He just implied Lansbury should have gone too.
 
Rafa had no complaints that Shelvey was sent off. He just implied Lansbury should have gone too.
I don't think him saying Shelvey "made a mistake" is the same as saying he should have seen a red card.

Either way, he must have thought we had good grounds for the appeal or it wouldn't have been lodged, that in itself implies that on reflection he didn't think Shelvey should have seen red.
 
Makes it even better. The injustice


Aye they were lucky to have 2 men sent off and lose a game

The bastards

See, there's always an upside for you lot. Lose the appeal and we're without our players, win the appeal and the FA themselves agree "we wuz robbed".

It'd be hilarious if was happening to someone else. :( :lol:
 
...
Nope. For it to be a red it has to be clear that no attempt was made to win the ball.

e.g. It is a red if Dummet pulls Lansbury back by his stupid f***ing hair do, as it's clear that no attempt to win the ball has been made.
It's not a red if (as is the case here) it's not clear that no attempt was made. Because Lansbury is already going down before contact is made and puts his body in such a position to force contact with Dummett, it's not reasonable to state that Dummett wasn't going to make a a genuine attempt for the ball. Lansbury's dive renders that assertion impossible to make, with any credibility.

I'm surprised Shelvey's was overturned and am pretty confident that if the game had happened at 3pm on a Saturday, and as such had missed the widespread criticism that followed it, we wouldn't have seen both rescinded.



So they're due a good call. ;)
This is bang on, good post. The dummett one was always getting overturned as since the rule change (which I'm guessing the ref missed) it definitely wasn't a red card. Surprised at the shelvey one cause it looks to me like he tried to kick him twice.
 
...
Nope. For it to be a red it has to be clear that no attempt was made to win the ball.

e.g. It is a red if Dummet pulls Lansbury back by his stupid f***ing hair do, as it's clear that no attempt to win the ball has been made.
It's not a red if (as is the case here) it's not clear that no attempt was made. Because Lansbury is already going down before contact is made and puts his body in such a position to force contact with Dummett, it's not reasonable to state that Dummett wasn't going to make a a genuine attempt for the ball. Lansbury's dive renders that assertion impossible to make, with any credibility.

I'm surprised Shelvey's was overturned and am pretty confident that if the game had happened at 3pm on a Saturday, and as such had missed the widespread criticism that followed it, we wouldn't have seen both rescinded.



So they're due a good call. ;)
Ah, I see it now. Subtle indeed. Thanks for articulating it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top