Is there a protocol in place for if say, Chelsea, when 2-0 up walked off the field and the game was abandoned due to racist chanting? Do we actually know what would happen to the result, or is this some sort of trial an error, hopefully not cross that bridge, cock up? I see a lot of people championing the idea, but very little questions behind it.
As amusing as that comment is, I was kinda referring to their last game, rather than ways of seeing us not lose this game. I think we all need to understand the implications of the action, before we inevitably encounter it. The sport clearly needs to make a stand, but we can't trust the rule makers to make the rules up as they go along.
It’s a difficult thing to police. If it is allowed to impact on the result, ie match abandoned and replayed at a later date, you could have opposition fans infiltrating crowds masquerading as fans of one team, deliberately trying to get the game stopped, if it would benefit their own team. I think the only way is to identify the culprits and have them attend a police station at kickoff time for all their own team’s games for an indefinite period.
You make a good point, but I don't think the authorities know how to stop it during a game. They'll probably wait for it to happen at a tiny League 1 or 2 club and then fine them or close a section of the ground.
However, bit of a no-brainer for them to appeal as I believe if rejected they get an extra game ban which is the Middlesborough away in the cup game that he would have most probably been rested for anyway. So win-win.
May be I'm getting too cynical but they like to show that they are doing something as long as it doesn't affect the big boys. If it's in the Prem it'll be at Sheffield Utd or Burnley, somewhere like that. Although it was fairly innocuous, if Son gets away with that it will be a joke. He did take an aviodable extra kick and it's unlikely after VAR had a good look. They wouldn't would they?
of course, I think it won’t be long, possibly during the next year or two when a team walks off. I think this will also support homosexuality in sport as I feel this will provide a means to people coming out if they wish knowing action will be taken in the same way if any vocalised noise about it is fished out in the same way monkey chants are. I mean in the way that currently someone who is homosexual can hide it but bring black you can’t. It provides an opportunity to cover not just racism.
The racial allegations during the spurs and Chelsea game so far have found to be inconclusive.....interesting because a spurs ST holder fiend of mine (who was there) has told me no one heard anything racial at all (including the stewards).........be interesting to see what unfolds. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50898486
I can understand Spurs choosing to review. (Not saying I agree, but I can understand.) If this was last season, pre-VAR, and the referee had sent Son off (ie on the field), I'm certain that Spurs would have chosen to appeal - despite the TV evidence of what Son did. It just seems to be a normal reaction by football clubs to many red cards for violent conduct: appeal. So the fact that such TV evidence is now being used this season to assist in making the on-field decision, shouldn't really change the above. It's still the same TV evidence as we've had in previous seasons. So if a club was happy to making their own judgement of such evidence last year (and duly conclude an error has been made), they should largely be as happy to make their own judgement of the the evidence this year.
And so, Spud watch begins for the second day running. Hopefully this is a dirty game with loads of cards. All in the spirit of christmas.
