Three games. Fair enough; Chelsea, which I'm not overly bothered about, and two league games that will give Rashford, hopefully, the chance to show his stuff. In the meantime Zlat concentrates on Europe. Mings has appealed so with any luck he'll now get at least five games. ****er.
Tyrone Mings has got off lightly in my opinion, He could've caused serious damage to Zlatan Ibrahimovic.
They would have had the same punishment if Mings hadn't appealed both the stamp and the elbow are just as dangerous.
Not really. Six metal studs to the temple with the weight of a fully grown human behind them can do a lot more damage than an elbow to the cheekbone. The amount of people who die after having their head stamped on during fights is testament to that. The FA made the argument for Mings receiving a harsher ban before he said he would appeal. Probably the only reason he did appeal was that he realised a long ban was coming his way.
Erm...yes I would. When Dembele received his 6 match ban after jabbing a finger in Costa's eye, I was in complete support. In this case, both players displayed equally dangerous behaviour imo. I've seen a bloke suffer a brain hemorrhage due to being elbowed in the head by a sunday league twat. I hadn't realised Mings had appealed - that usually leads to a 1 game penalty increase if the appeal was deemed 'frivolous' (which it was). But still, the same basic 4 match ban should've been applied to Zlatan, especially as he clearly attempts to stamp on Mings first in the same incident.
Ever see anyone die from an elbow to the head? Cos there are at least ten cases of people dying after having their head stamped on from the first page of Google alone, but the only one I could find who died after an elbow to the head was an MMA fighter who was elbowed repeatedly in a professional bout. Mings' extra games weren't due to an appeal - that sanction only kicks in if he appeals against the decision, not against the charge. He got the two extra games because stamping on someone's head is a lot more violent and objectively dangerous than elbowing someone's head.
It wasn't a fight mate and neither incident was going to end up with the other player dead, both were going at it and the punishment should not come down to to some bunch at the FA trying to decide which was worse. Looking at the overall spat between them they sould both have had the same punishment imo.
Surely that's the whole purpose of the FA's disciplinary committee mate? To assess the severity of a disciplinary incident and decide what punishment is necessary. After all, if one player slaps another in the face and the other responds by smashing his face in you would expect them both to be sent off but you wouldn't expect them to receive the same punishment. Incidents of different severity must be punished differently or the game just becomes a farce.
There should be clear rules other than a bunch of old men going through MOTD highlights and having an opinion.
There are clear rules: www.thefa.com/TheFA/~/media/48069C5515B944F29C1FC1F9E4138728.ashx/ Says very clearly that a punishment should take account of the level of force and type of offence