Andy Carroll Red Card

  • 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!
fatletiss said:
why? I thought you said the legal threat was about the procedure, not the outcome. If so, the FA have allowed an independent tribunal and they have upheld the decision. Over.
Click to expand...

An independent tribunal is not a court of law though is it. Who is on it? How independent are they? If West Ham were serious then they still need to go legal on their asses. If they don't then they're exposed as cheaters effectively, by trying to influence the outcome with empty threats of litigation.
 
pass the football said:
An independent tribunal is not a court of law though is it. Who is on it? How independent are they? If West Ham were serious then they still need to go legal on their asses. If they don't then they're exposed as cheaters effectively, by trying to influence the outcome with empty threats of litigation.
Click to expand...

No it is not, but that is the point; they threatened legal, but didn't need to because the FA allowed the tribunal (I am only taking that from what you posted earlier)

Your last point I think may be right. They even said somewhere that they wouldn't have done this if they had been mid-table.
 
The relationship between West Ham and the FA has always been strained ever since the Tevez affair.

Doesn't surprise me in the least that this situation has occurred.
 
I don't like West Ham but it's fair enough. It should have been rescinded. Anyone claiming otherwise is letting their hatred or dislike of West Ham cloud their judgement.
 
RelentlessPressure said:
I don't like West Ham but it's fair enough. It should have been rescinded. Anyone claiming otherwise is letting their hatred or dislike of West Ham cloud their judgement.
Click to expand...

Looking at it in isolation it deserved to be overturned but going by the precedent FA has set it would have been incredibly hypocritical to have done so, and consistency is the most important thing in these matters.
 
RelentlessPressure said:
I don't like West Ham but it's fair enough. It should have been rescinded. Anyone claiming otherwise is letting their hatred or dislike of West Ham cloud their judgement.
Click to expand...

I rarely make comment on refs' decisions but Carroll swung his elbow at Flores. On that basis, and that basis alone a sending off was correct. It's the swing, not the reason, provocation, player, team or even how effective the swing is that makes such an action deserve a sending off.

Vin
 
Onionman said:
RelentlessPressure said:
I don't like West Ham but it's fair enough. It should have been rescinded. Anyone claiming otherwise is letting their hatred or dislike of West Ham cloud their judgement.
Click to expand...

I rarely make comment on refs' decisions but Carroll swung his elbow at Flores. On that basis, and that basis alone a sending off was correct. It's the swing, not the reason, provocation, player, team or even how effective the swing is that makes such an action deserve a sending off.

Vin
Click to expand...

Quite right Vin.
 
Mikey said:
Looking at it in isolation it deserved to be overturned but going by the precedent FA has set it would have been incredibly hypocritical to have done so, and consistency is the most important thing in these matters.
Click to expand...

Fair enough response but I'd rather the FA just grew some balls and overturned these sort of decisions.

Onionman said:
I rarely make comment on refs' decisions but Carroll swung his elbow at Flores. On that basis, and that basis alone a sending off was correct. It's the swing, not the reason, provocation, player, team or even how effective the swing is that makes such an action deserve a sending off.

Vin
Click to expand...

It was more of a get the f**k off me gesture than anything else. Chico had just been all over him. It was a yellow for me. It looks worse as he is a giant. Not bothering to argue any further.
 
RelentlessPressure said:
Fair enough response but I'd rather the FA just grew some balls and overturned these sort of decisions.



It was more of a get the f**k off me gesture than anything else. Chico had just been all over him. It was a yellow for me. It looks worse as he is a giant. Not bothering to argue any further.
Click to expand...

If he had connected, and Chico had blood everywhere, then everyone would of been saying red card. Heard that on talksport!!
 
RelentlessPressure said:
It was more of a get the f**k off me gesture than anything else. Chico had just been all over him. It was a yellow for me. It looks worse as he is a giant. Not bothering to argue any further.
Click to expand...

As was Gaston's last year with Shane Long trying to foul him but it is still a red card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back