Whatever the merits or otherwise of Nani's sending off last night, and whether we feel ManU got their come-uppance, the fact is that red cards and condemning one team to play the remainder of a match with ten (or less) players, usually ruins a match as a spectacle. Tickets are not cheap these days, and to pay £50 or £60 to watch a match where one team has a numerical handicap just seems to me to be the wrong way of dealing with bad/dangerous behaviour on the pitch. Surely it's time to look at the example of rugby or hockey, where an offending player is sent off the pitch into a sin bin for 10 mins or so. The length of any subsequent match ban for that player can then be decided later in the cold light of day (in other words, with ref and linos sitting down to discuss it, possibly aided by match video footage.) If this isn't considered sufficient punishment for the offender, then send the player off permanently, penalise his team for 10 or 15 minutes of 10 man play, and then allow that team to bring on a sub as the 11th player. At least this way, spectators won't have the frustration of knowing that they've paid a fortune to watch a poorly balanced 10 v 11 player match. Views?
I reckon that not getting sent off and therefore not ruining the game for the spectators is the responsibility of the players. Taking last night's example, that referee had a history of being a bit card-happy in his previous European games - especially those involving UK teams. So they should know and act accordingly. The rules are fine, it's just that different refs interpret them rather than applying them, and that confuses the players, who are generally simple souls and who would benefit from a few absolutes in the game.
A long time ago you had to do something bad to get sent off, now you just have to breath on a player. Denying a goal scoring chance should be no card and a penalty, even if its outside the box. Id like red cards to be 15 minutes down to ten men and then the team are able to replace the player or maybe every red card offence is a penalty and then the player has to be replaced. Something needs to be done.
I would say primary responsibility to spectators lies with the football regulator. The regulator should ensure that punishment coming to a player for bad conduct should not have to be suffered by those watching the game. That's the philosophy in most other sports. If the bulk of the punishment is built into a subsequent ban, the paying customers won't suffer and those fans buying tickets for the future 3 or 4 matches, will do so in the full knowledge that that particular player is suspended and they won't be seeing him on the pitch.
However, Goldhawk, what you're forgetting is this: In Rugby (one of the sports you mention in the OP) the first cardable offence is the 10 minutes off the pitch. if it becomes more serious / dangerous play, the player can still get dismissed for the rest of the game without replacement. In effect, the punishment in Rugby is more stringent than in football. Mind you, the conduct of the players in Rugby is generally much better than in football. So these cards are far less often shown. For me it's simple - most players manage to get through the game without getting a yellow or a red. Those that can't have clearly done something that can be interpreted (by the ref in the specific game) as being bad enough to warrant punishment. It would be better if the ref's interpretation of the rules when it comes to dangerous play were restricted, and that globally, a challenge warranting a red card gets treated exactly the same, no matter where the offence, no matter who the offender, and no matter what the game or the official. Then the players are clear: do this and you are off. They will soon stop offending if they know they won't get away with it, and the fans will no longer 'suffer'.
French, Turkish and Rench / Spanish colleagues here all thought raising your leg that high near an opponent warrants a red card for dangerous play! For me that ruling applied consistently would rule out a big part of why I find football good to watch - for instance the overhead / scissors kiock -shot. invariably made from inside a crowded penalty box. I reckon the Madrid player should have had yellow becasue it looked like he went in intentionally to get Nani a booking! Whatever for me it was never a red for either player. I think each team should have the right to have a couple of referee/ linesmen decisions a game reviewed by Video evidence to cut out some of the worse decisions, in addition to goal line and side line technology - but its got to be limited so the game don't become like American football. I'm not sure your proposals are tough enough Golhawk.
I didn't feel the game suffered last night as a spectacle after the red card, plenty of end to end action and ManU had more than enough chances to score. Our first win against Chelsea where they went down to 9 was another case where the 9 were more than a match for the 11. There are plenty of examples of games won by 10 against 11. I think the sanction is needed, the sin bin idea could easily be cynically exploited. I don't think it's broke, don't need fixing.
It is broke, players are wrongly sent off every week. Cheating wins the game. If they are only off for 15mins then theres less incentive to cheat, players wouldnt cheat and pass up an open goal to make sure they contacted the goalie because they know a red card and pen is better than tapping the ball into the net. Remove the red card and only an idiot dives when he has an open goal.
its not red cards that are the problem, it is players cheating to try and gain an advantage which is the problem the Real Madrid player did nothing to try and get Nanny Goat sent off last night so I have no problem with it
Well of course according to some he did it on purpose and deserved a yellow! Last nights red card wasnt that bad. Derrys and Bartons against Norwich were appalling, both victims of cheats faking contact, both upheld by the FA. Its a licence to cheat. We had 4 points at the time of the red cards, we ended up with 0.
As for Rugby, Willy, I agree the conduct of players towards the referee is generally better, but the players can get away with more violent stuff on the pitch, so sendings off in rugby are pretty rare - it needs to be serious. Gouging eyes in the scrum, spear tackling etc The question for football is still, when a player is guilty of dangerous play, who are the authorities trying to punish? The player? Sure, so send him off. The team and club? Yes, but I think it should be in a qualified way i.e. make the team play for 10 mins with 10 men before allowing on a sub. The fans? Presumably not, but they are punished at the moment. There are exceptions, but most 10 v 11 games are a spoiled spectacle imho.
I like the idea of a sin bin - but was wondering, would the subs that come in be counted as one of the 3 or is this an exceptional situation?
Or maybe allow a 4th only to be used for replacing a player sent off. i dont suppose it matters much as most managers keep their 3rd sub until the final 15 mins and you wont be able to replace a player anyway if he gets sent off in the final 15 mins.
http://thebiglead.fantasysportsven.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/red-card.gif At least us British know how to have a good laugh! please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
