Football - John Terry's red card fiasco...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Had Terry played for a team like Middlesbrough, rather than getting it rescinded i would expect the ban would have been lengthened for a 'frivolous' appeal :rolleyes:
 
Definitely should have been rescinded. Although I am surprised, as the foul definitely deserved a yellow card.

With a straight red, they cannot downgrade it after the game, only rescind it entirely. So I am surprised this happened, although very happy as a Chelsea fan.
 
Nursie said:
My understanding is that they, can't downgrade a straight red card to a yellow.

*Beaten*
Click to expand...

Ah right, he should be punished, I'd rather the red stand than him getting nothing at all. I'm sick of tactical fouls, getting the Chelsea captain would have sent a very clear message. What's the point in all this "taking a yellow card for the team" nonsense?
 
Greenlizard0 said:
Ah right, he should be punished, I'd rather the red stand than him getting nothing at all. I'm sick of tactical fouls, getting the Chelsea captain would have sent a very clear message. What's the point in all this "taking a yellow card for the team" nonsense?
Click to expand...

The rules are there, its not the players fault that the rules allow things like that.
 
It was never a red card in the first place.

Loved how Fergie moaned that Vidic shouldn't of been sent off for 2 clear yellow bookable offences and now is moaning at this.
 
It was the wrong decision in the first place (although I can see what the ref was thinking, it deserved a red, even if the rules don't say it, and it could well be judged excessive force..), but it was also the wrong decision to rescind it. That suggests that deliberatly hauling down a player to stop him attacking because you've cocked up and been beating is acceptable, which it isn't.
 
andi said:
It was the wrong decision in the first place (although I can see what the ref was thinking, it deserved a red, even if the rules don't say it, and it could well be judged excessive force..), but it was also the wrong decision to rescind it. That suggests that deliberatly hauling down a player to stop him attacking because you've cocked up and been beating is acceptable, which it isn't.
Click to expand...

It isn't acceptable. But, until the rules state otherwise; it isn't a red card offense.
 
andi said:
but it was also the wrong decision to rescind it. That suggests that deliberatly hauling down a player to stop him attacking because you've cocked up and been beating is acceptable, which it isn't.
Click to expand...

So because it was a foul that means the over reaction by the ref shouldn't be corrected? It wasn't a red card so of course it should be rescinded. The only thing wrong in all this is that it wasn't (or couldn't be) downgraded to a yellow.

Im not sure why some of the Mancs are so upset about Terry getting off, they should be happy that Vidic didn't get a straight red for either of his bookings as both could have easily resulted in a straight red (albeit they may have seemed harsh); when Vidic fouled Keane, Ferdinand was a fair way away so im not sure how it wasn't a goalscoring opportunity and Vidic's 2nd challenge was definately wreckless and dangerous and definately fitted the 'serious foul play' criteria more than Terry's red did.
 
It should be corrected, but like you say, the rules say you can't change it to a yellow, so instead, he's got off without getting a card at all, which is wrong.

I personally don't give a hoot if he plays against us, I'd say the same thing if they were playing Hull at the weekend. And what has Vidic got to do with this? He was rightly given two yellows, his own daft fault, but both were the right decision.
 
andi said:
It should be corrected, but like you say, the rules say you can't change it to a yellow, so instead, he's got off without getting a card at all, which is wrong.
Click to expand...

No card makes less of an impact than a red card does. Also Chelsea and Terry have already been partially (wrongly) punished by having to play the end of the City game with 10 men.
andi said:
I personally don't give a hoot if he plays against us, I'd say the same thing if they were playing Hull at the weekend. And what has Vidic got to do with this? He was rightly given two yellows, his own daft fault, but both were the right decision.
Click to expand...
That part of my post wasn't aimed just at you. Fergie, some people on here and the usual idiots writing into SSN etc are moaning at Chelsea getting (rightly) off but ignored the fact that they were possibly lucky to get away with only a 1 game ban for Vidic.
 
Majago said:
I thought it was recinded on a technicality because the referee sent him off for serious foul play (which it wasn't) as opposed to a professional foul (which it was).

Had the ref put the reason down differently the outcome of the appeal would have been different.
Click to expand...

My understanding too.

If it had been put down as a professional foul then it wouldn't have been recinded as it is definately a yellow and they can't down-grade it.

As it wasn't serious foul play they've recinded it.

Still ******** to me like :p

No swearing
 
Raymond Lin said:
I said it in the weekend football thread but repost here as it is more relevant.

This clearly sets a precedent now! It practically send a message out saying that:- you can rugby tackle players and not get a card.
Click to expand...

The game is already a joke at times with PROFESSIONAL players, a) throwing themselves over trying to get free kicks or get other players sent of, or, b) pretending to be hit to get players sent off.

Now we have rugby tackles officially endorsed!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom