Absolutely, I agree with this. I just put up the link. I'm not suggesting I agree with it. Then again, Graham Poll certainly knows more about refereeing than I ever will. There's no doubt about it though, Halsey had a poor game on Saturday. I would hate to think that a club was relegated or promoted on a few key mistakes, such as he made in the match.
You mentioned it both on the off topic thread and the this weekends other matches thread. I don't think you should be annoyed at Mcmanaman he's a young boy who on his full debut made a rash challenge. It's experienced players like Ferdinand who deliberately hurt players (like torres) and get away with it who you should aim your anger at.
So what? He's a professional player just like the rest. He should be held accountable in exactly the same way. Intent should be irrelevant (with obvious exceptions: click,) and you should be judged on your actions on the pitch.
It was NOT his full ****ing debut. Why do people keep saying this? It was his first start in the PL. He has come off the bench in the PL before and has played in plenty of cup games. There is no excuse for a tackle like that. It may not have been malicious but it was dangerous.
A bigger deal is made about a first league debut, because typically that means they're in the team's best XI.
Newcastle United assistant manager John Carver is charged with misconduct by the FA in relation to a fracas at half-time during Sunday's Premier League fixture at Wigan. He has until 16:00 GMT on Friday to respond. What the ****ing ****? This is inconsistency of the most blatant fashion.
And as I already explained to you, it was his full debut in the league. Why you feel everyone needs to clarify they mean "in the league" when it's obvious to everyone else I'm not sure. Maybe nobody saw it
Yep Wigan certainly were lucky, no sending off when there should have been and an allowed goal that shouldn't have been. I hope the points they got against Newcastle don't end up biting us in the backside
This is yet another example of our sport being governed via a set of rules drawn up before photography was even conceived. Wherever you stand on "in game" use of technology, you surely cannot condone its continued status of "inadmissible" after the event. I bet there isn't a referee in the land who wouldn't welcome the introduction of technology that would bring help bring consistency and fair play back to the game, regardless of the point at which it is used.
As others have touched upon it's widely accepted that your first league start is considered your full debut. I'm not saying theres an excuse, I said he should get the usual red card punishment. I was just raising issue at you misdirecting (and slightly overeacting with) your anger at a daft challenge from an inexperienced and eager to please player. Aim it at the twats like Ferdinand and Suarez who get away with stamps and kicks all the time!
Why should he be treated differently to those others? Should we just invoke the Little Rascal rule in his case, ruffle his hair and send him on his way?
Why should he get more than a suspension of 2-3 games? As i've said (twice now) I'm not siding with the FA I think he should be punished but not overly. My beef is with the fact that Tom (and others) are pissed off with this young fella instead of directing this anger at more frequent offenders.
But Ferdinand and Suarez, whilst being twats, are only causing short-term pain or slight damage, McManaman could have easily ended Haidara's career, there's a difference in the gravity of the situations, surely?
But, as disgraceful as they are, they don't do an awful lot of damage. It's the stupid challenges from the inexperienced and eager to please that do the damage. A kick or a stamp will not do nearly as much damage as a very very poor tackle. At the end of the day, it is far more likely the player on the end of the tackle will be stretchered off rather than the player that has been kicked or stamped on. So I will aim my anger at these types of challenges.
The comparison I'm making is one of intent not of seriousness. Why get angry at something that was clearly not intended to harm the player? Rio, Suarez etc all commit acts like this knowing it will hurt the player. It's all about intent for me.
The pfa were part of the "stakeholders" that agreed these rules at the start of the season. They appear to be more interested in stopping their members being charged retrospectively , than protecting them. Taylor should come out and condemn this tackle and call for a ban.
Intent? Irrelevant. Mcmanaman has a brain (supposedly). Eagerness and inexperience just doesn't cut it for me. It doesn't take a genius to work out going in with your studs showing at knee height could cause a serious injury. These types of challenges are on a par with violent conduct IMO (except special circumstances like Barton v City).
