Logically it should be. Young was an offisde position and therefore QPR had a freekick for the infringement . What happened after the infringement is immaterial and the red card should be overturned.
Play should have stopped and restarted with a free kick for QPR. So neither the threat of Young and his block by Derry should have counted for anything. I think United will support the appeal.
Derry has had his appeal rejected and the the red card stands. Baffling decision but should not be a surprise considering it is an FA panel that makes these decisions.
It probably should have been rescinded, but I can see why the FA didn't. They won't allow QPR to appeal the offside decision, so the decision is all about the tackle. And there was contact, no matter how minor, so the FA won't overrule the FA when there is any evidence to support the original decision. They're simply too concerned with trying to support the referee's original decision to try and consider what's actually right. Do you honestly think he was through on goal? He was moving sideways without the ball fully under control. Imo the penalty was soft, albeit debatable, but there was no way it should have been a red.
And the cheat (in this case Ashley Young*) continues to prosper. *known as a serial diver. I don't think for one moment that the incident necessarily change the outcome of the match ... but it does affect the next match QPR play. All the FA bullshit about "fair play" and we see players diving around all over the place week in and week out, dropping down like they have a broken leg only to get up and run the full length of the pitch 30 seconds later, players pressurising the referee to try and get someone sent off, claiming throw-ins and corners when they blatantly know that it came off them last, etc, etc. Once every few weeks someone will get booked for it and that's it. It might seem funny to Ashley, it might seem the "professional thing to do", but it just shows how far this game has degenerated. Manchester United will be champions ... but champions of a pile of ****.
It all stems from a shocking decision from an incompetent linesman. If the right decision (and it was an easy one FFS) then we wouldnt be having this controversy. However, I think that once a foul is given like this, with Young going past Derry, there was no choice for the ref. He had to give a red IMO. I think QPR had been wrongly done by. I am not sure they or Hughes expected anything from the game and the sending off IMO would not have affected the ultimate outcome. BUT it is not fair for QPR to be without Derrry for the next match. The FA is just plain wrong.
Of course he was in on goal. The debateable element is whether or not the touch hindered Young's ability to control the ball. I think he would have gone on to control the ball quite easily (or should have considering he is a professional footballer). It's not like the Torres incident a few years ago when he was playing for Liverpool and O'Shea stopped him from getting onto a through ball. Then, the ref gave a yellow only because the ball was pretty much already in VDS's gloves. Again, that highlights even more inconsistancies for me. You often hear that decisions aren't given because the player wasn't going to get onto the ball, so does that mean you can lump an attacker purely because the through ball has reached the goalkeeper? Of course not. But the fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter that Young has been proven to been offside at the time of the incident. So for the appeal, that "fact" has no bearing whatsoever. You can't rescind a red card purely because the player has gone down easily. Rescinding a card can only be done for blantant mistakes by the referee. So if the referee misses a player commiting an act of violent conduct, but the thing with fouls is that they are always viewed differently by people. Some may see excessive force, others may see a hard but fair tackle. This is why technology CANNOT be used for fouls, because it is not yes or no most of the time.
This is only my opinion. I think there was contact and he exagerated his fall. Different fans might have differing views on this but my definition of a dive is one where no contact is made at all and for which the player should be yellow carded. Using that definition, Carroll (against newcastle) was a dive for example and Young wasn't.
If you put it like that Derry must one of the strongest people on the earth. After that superslight touch Young flew like he had been hit by klitshko. Manchester United is the best team in england no doubt ,they have some fantastic footballers and young is one of them. Such a great club but still some of their supporters can't admit the truth if it is unpleasant to them.
He wasn't really going past him imo - he was moving sideways away from Derry but towards the other QPR CB. He would have gone on to control the ball easily, but given the speed and direction in which he was moving I doubt he would've been able to get a shot off had Derry not touched him at all. The rules say you need to consider the direction the player is moving before you can give a red card, and for me Young was moving away from the goal too much for it to be a red. Of course he chose to fall, but then that is what 99% of modern footballers do in that situation. The referees chief and QPR's assistant manager both admitted that they tell players to dive when there is contact in the box, otherwise they won't get a penalty. You only have to look at players like Drogba and Carroll who are able to hold the ball up all day when challenged outside the box, but drop like a stone as soon as someone even comes close to touching them inside the box to see that it's just the way football is played nowadays. Even when there is a bit of contact, like Luiz on Helgurson, the player exaggerates the contact to get the penalty. Ultimately I'd much rather the refs and FA required more contact before giving a penalty, but then they are just trying to make their jobs easier. Contact = penalty, no contact = no penalty under the current rules. No a great system, but it's hard to see how you can have some sort of objective "strength-o-meter" test to determine whether the contact was enough to knock the player over or not.
If this was the other way round, Man United would have had the red rescinded. Should of been offside and it was a pathetic dive from a cheat, yet FA still don't rescind the red card. Crazy.
FA/ referees clearly favour the bigger clubs over small clubs. I still don't see a ban for Ivanovic punching someone, guess just in case it damages their attempts of FA Cup final/ Top 5 finish. EDIT - Haha. Should ask for this more often, literally minutes after I posted that. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11668/7663741/Ivanovic-given-FA-charge
