Derry's appeal rejected

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
SpursDisciple

SpursDisciple

Booking: Mod abuse - overturned on appeal
Forum Moderator
Jan 25, 2011
30,768
16,434
113
Rochester
Not Spurs related, but have to state my utter incredulity that the FA have rejected that appeal. It was offside ffs and so no foul. Coupled with the fact that Young took the most ludicrous dive I have seen in ages, I thought that was a nailed on overturn. If the ref had an ounce of decency he would have admitted his mistake 10 mins after the game.
 
i didnt see the incident HD but are you suggesting that because it was offside then hypothetically it is ok to foul someone because it is not in game?

forgive me not being a smart arse just that bit when you said 'it was offside so no foul'
 
Dona_mara said:
i didnt see the incident HD but are you suggesting that because it was offside then hypothetically it is ok to foul someone because it is not in game?

forgive me not being a smart arse just that bit when you said 'it was offside so no foul'
Click to expand...

Good point. If the "offence" had been violent in any way, then of course the red card is justified regardless. But it was only a red card because it denied a goal scoring opportunity, and clearly the fact that it was offside meant no such opportunity should have existed. This coupled with the fact that he barely touched him and Young went down like he'd been shot meant in my eyes it wasn't even a foul.
 
HarrysDisciple said:
Good point. If the "offence" had been violent in any way, then of course the red card is justified regardless. But it was only a red card because it denied a goal scoring opportunity, and clearly the fact that it was offside meant no such opportunity should have existed. This coupled with the fact that he barely touched him and Young went down like he'd been shot meant in my eyes it wasn't even a foul.
Click to expand...

LDL is right tho, the FA cannot look at it and say as he was offside we are going to overturn the decision. Young was deemed onside (although he wasnt) and the ref's interpretation is that it was a foul stopping a goal scoring opportunity, the FA's hands were tied in my opinion and they had no choice there.
 
littleDinosaurLuke said:
Yes, Young was offside, but Derry grabbed at his shirt. OK, it was a soft penalty on the basis of the challenge.

However, as the offside wasn't called and Derry did foul Young, denying him a goalscoring opportunity, the appeal had to fail.
Click to expand...

well if that was a penalty, the two for Norwich yesterday should have been given three times over each. could have been 1-4 with a more professional ref.

Seriously the refs are crumbling into mediocrity in this league at the mo. Martinez got given an apology for the two offside goals given to chelsea. What ****ing good is an apology? Does an apology count as 3 points? or one? No? I think he'd rather you just reffed the game fairly and competently in the first place!
 
littleDinosaurLuke said:
Yes, Young was offside, but Derry grabbed at his shirt. OK, it was a soft penalty on the basis of the challenge.

However, as the offside wasn't called and Derry did foul Young, denying him a goalscoring opportunity, the appeal had to fail.
Click to expand...

He did not grab his shirt, there was a slight push and I mean slight.
 
SuperSpursAllStars said:
LDL is right tho, the FA cannot look at it and say as he was offside we are going to overturn the decision. Young was deemed onside (although he wasnt) and the ref's interpretation is that it was a foul stopping a goal scoring opportunity, the FA's hands were tied in my opinion and they had no choice there.
Click to expand...

True, it's either that, or basically say that the lino is an incompetent idiot. If they rescind the red card, then that's pretty much what they would be saying. Not going to happen, unfortunately for Derry.
 
littleDinosaurLuke said:
A middle aged bloke chasing a lot of athletes around the pitch and being expected to make decisions without the aid of technology is bound to prove fallible. In the circumstances, these refs do quite well, all things considered.

The problem is that the FA don't look to find ways to assist the refs or to try to do justice retrospectively for their errors. Instead, they ignore the issues and "support" the refs stubbornly and pigheadedly by refusing to review decisions in a critical way, thus ensuring that they won't be seen to be undermined in any way at all.
Click to expand...


From what i saw, Luke. The Lino was directly in line with the incident, yet apparently "didn't see it"
 
Absolutely unbelievable this hasnt been overturned, obviously they dont want a Man Utd player being considered a diver (which he is, and it was).
 
It was never a foul in a million years.
Regardless of the offside, this should've been chalked off for simply not being a foul.
It was a massive, obvious dive.

The officials really aren't doing themselves any favours at the moment, on or off the pitch.
What's the point in having someone that's ****ed up reviewing their own decisions?
"Did you make a total balls up of this one?"
"Er, no. Of course I didn't." :emoticon-0141-whew:
 
This outcome was pretty much on the cards as both a referee and his assistant would have had to have admitted to making errors - and that just wasn't going to happen.
And no, it wasn't a foul - the alleged 'tug' by Derry was so light it would barely have interrupted the flight of a moth let alone caused a full international athlete to jack-knife in mid air and plummet to the ground....

Oh well, not all bad news today: the Chavs may well lose their most regular goal scorer Ivanovic for a few games for the punch against Wigan. You'd almost think there were people on here petitioning to get that....... <diva>
 
The fact that it was offside is arbitrary to being able to rescind the red card. As LDL said, the ref and linesman interpreted it as onside, Young was fouled by last man Derry => he was right to be sent off.
If you look at where contact between Young and Derry could have been made, and the fall made by Young, it is fairly obvious that the contact by Derry had absolutely nothing to do with the fall from Young. It is a clear and obvious dive and thoroughly deserved a booking. A disgraceful decision by the FA not to overturn the red card.

I could not believe my eyes when I read the article on the BBC. Shocking.
 
e did not grab his shirt, there was a slight push and I mean slight.
Click to expand...

Go over your local fields tomorrow. Run flat out. Get one of your kids to give you a gentle push. See what happens.....

Most TV viewers haven't got a clue about:

(a) the physical impact of a "touch" on a player and,
(b) being a linesman/referee.

If you think referees are **** go and referee your local under 8's and see how you feel. Then think about refereeing a Premiership football match where everything happens at 100mph.

Refs/linesman are human beings and will always make mistakes. FACT.
 
PleasenotPoll - It was never a foul in a million years.
Regardless of the offside, this should've been chalked off for simply not being a foul.
It was a massive, obvious dive.

The officials really aren't doing themselves any favours at the moment, on or off the pitch.
What's the point in having someone that's ****ed up reviewing their own decisions?
"Did you make a total balls up of this one?"
"Er, no. Of course I didn't."
Click to expand...

Perhaps you can enlighten us with your vast experience of participation in sport?
 
A middle aged bloke chasing a lot of athletes around the pitch and being expected to make decisions without the aid of technology is bound to prove fallible. In the circumstances, these refs do quite well, all things considered.

The problem is that the FA don't look to find ways to assist the refs or to try to do justice retrospectively for their errors. Instead, they ignore the issues and "support" the refs stubbornly and pigheadedly by refusing to review decisions in a critical way, thus ensuring that they won't be seen to be undermined in any way at all.
Click to expand...

Luke - you may not be a dinosaur after all!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back