Controversial decision?

[Wattsy]

Hmmm, won't let me view the video saying it's 'Private'

[Mewcenary]

I'm with Krooner on this one. It is a clear as day instance of Violent Conduct on a Spectator, so the player has to be dismissed. It's an impressive takedown, it has to be said. The stewards and police may not have been the fastest on the block but the player took it too far!!

 

The report should hopefully explain the circumstances, but there is video evidence, so I would hope the FA is ultimately sympathetic when it comes to the charge.

 

 

[Mewcenary]

Surely in circumstances like this common sense must prevail, but then we are dealing now with the FA to sort this out.......

Lack of common sense is killing the game in many ways.

 

Personally I think the referee is to blame as he should be in charge of the happenings on the pitch and he failed miserably on that count. If he was happy to stand by and do nothing he should have communicated that to the players, that they were to wait until the streaker was taken off.

 

Don't agree. The referee shouldn't have to say, "Don't wrestle them to the ground" at that level of game, the same way I don't have to say, "Player, don't punch him in the face please" at Parks football. 21 other players on the pitch managed not to do it! (p.s. haven't counted them in case any had already been sent off )

 

 

Then again, I have had a player turn to me after a mass confrontation (following a stamp on the head...nice) that apparently I should have stepped amongst all those players and 'sorted it out, it's my job'....

 

 

[J G]

The player took it too far? Am I not watching the same clip?

 

I can understand, even though completely disagree, that the referee 'has to' send the player off but did he really take it too far?

 

I am thinking that this highlights one of the biggest problems with refereeing at the moment, causing a lot of the problems they are having, the lack of being able to use common sense. This is not the referees fault, more the powers that be.

[jertzee]

Don't agree. The referee shouldn't have to say, "Don't wrestle them to the ground" at that level of game,

 

Maybe not but no one did anything about that guy on the pitch and as the stewards were walking over the guy was just running away. The player did the right thing as the ref showed no control of the situation. I also do not think he used excessive force. The guy needed to be wrestled down as he was obviously not going to go off his own accord. If the policeman had carreid out the same "capture" they would not have been sued for excessive force...... so maybe the question is what is excessive force as we obviously do not agree.

 

I actually think that although the ref would argue he carried out the letter of the law he actually acted like a complete [****!!****].

[jertzee]

Genuine question - Is there anything in the laws of the game that states a referee can use common sense??

 

Surely the "playing advantage " law is that......?

[jc00086]

The problem is that if you allow for too much common sense (giving more discretion to referees) you will get players and managers moaning (more than they do already) about referees being inconsistent.

 

Unfortunately you can't have it both ways.

[Fat Boy]

Ridiculous decision. If he had to do something, why not a yellow?

 

Expect this yes man to be pushed up the leagues by the authorities for following the letter of the law.

[Charlie Farleigh]

Ridiculous decision. If he had to do something, why not a yellow?

 

Expect this yes man to be pushed up the leagues by the authorities for following the letter of the law.

By definition he is not strictly a spectator. I agree,a ridiculous decision and if the FA WERE to overturn the red card it surely proves the decision was the wrong one in the first place!

[Krooner]

What this shows is actually what is wrong with part of the game. That referee who has probably worked his backside off to get to that level feels he has to apply the law, which he has to do, otherwise he knows there is a danger he could throw a number of years of hard work away and get chucked down a level or 2. There are a number of things I disagree with in the laws of the game but it doesnt mean I should ignore them when they occur.

 

 

[J G]

The problem is that if you allow for too much common sense (giving more discretion to referees) you will get players and managers moaning (more than they do already) about referees being inconsistent.

 

Unfortunately you can't have it both ways.

 

There are certain laws of the game which have to be strictly followed and others that common sense can be applied, this is definately one. There are a few more that I can think of.

 

The funny thing is that the referee will get a pat on the back for his decision!

Edited March 8, 2011 by J G

[chessy boy]

Ian Walker pushed a spectator to the ground in a prem game a few years ago without being sent off, slightly different maybe as the guy was giving him some stick. In this case it would seem there was no chance of the guy have a conceled weapon quite the oppersit actually!!.

 

If a spectator enters the field of play does he stop being a spectator and become a threat? who is to say that the guy was not going to suddenly attack someone he could have been a nut job.

[Krooner]

That is a very good point chessy boy and I agree as Ian Walker should have been sent off and as we know the laws appear different for Prem players but it is being used as yet another chance of having a pop at the Match Referee. We should be looking at why the man was able to get onto the pitch, why he wasnt dealt with quickly enough and not at the referee who, whether people like it or not, applied the laws of the game set by someone other than him !!!!

[Green_Fingers]

That is a very good point chessy boy and I agree as Ian Walker should have been sent off and as we know the laws appear different for Prem players but it is being used as yet another chance of having a pop at the Match Referee. We should be looking at why the man was able to get onto the pitch, why he wasnt dealt with quickly enough and not at the referee who, whether people like it or not, applied the laws of the game set by someone other than him !!!!

 

Spot on as always Mr Krooner

[its-my-ball]

Just seen it on sky sports news

[Terrence Collina]

it was mentioned on the BBC website - the spectator did it for a bet and the player who got sent off was the manager.

 

 

[Big J R]

Stewards/Safety Officers are quite within their right to remove such idiots from the field of play, however, they cannot use excessive force.

 

The recognised manner is for the idiot concerned having his arms firmly but not painfully restrained by two stewards and led away. The idiot does have the right to sue if he feels he has been detained unfairly or too brutally.

 

I would image the red will be rescinded on an appeal as Kroons poster earlier.

[tempestward]

It is not like me to be picky, honest, but when I posted a link to a clip that was deemed to be "not CCL enough" it got shunted to another part of the forum, by Smudge. What is the difference here?

[Krooner]

Controversial Tempestward but a question that needs answering. Mr Mod ?

[Smudge]

It is not like me to be picky, honest, but when I posted a link to a clip that was deemed to be "not CCL enough" it got shunted to another part of the forum, by Smudge. What is the difference here?

 

 

Tempesteward,please apologise for your remarks,which I can assure you are incorrect,all I ever edit on here are spelling mistakes,because you have become pernickity,and pin items for people.IF YOU HAD SEEN THE SUN TODAY,THINK YOU WILL HAVE SEEN THEY HAVE BOUGHT THE RIGHTS TO THE VIDEO CLIP,OR HARRY HILLS BURPS HAVE.DO NOT IN ANYWAY BLAME ME,ALL I HAVE DONE IS OFFER MY SERVICES TO IAN,FREE OF CHARGE I MUST ADD,FOR THE PURPOSES OF AN ORDERLY FORUM.I BELIEVE IN FREE SPEECH,AND YOU HAVE HAD PLENTY TO SAY THAT COULD OF BEEN DELETED,EVEN ABOUT YOUR OWN SIDE EGHAM.