John Terry o/t

[shrimper]

Can't believe he got off with that one...

[marky No.1]

Player power of the top teams again eh? Although he will now be eligible to play against Man. U at the weekend so Fergie might quash it yet No doubt he will try and get Vidic off the hook now, paricularly as Carrick has a broken foot

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 18,00.html

[Skid]

The fact of the matter is that it was a terrible decision, John Terry wasn't even the last man, it was not a 'dangerous' tackle which could have caused serious injury!

Vidic was sent off for two yellows, rightly so as well, so any comparisons between the two are completely pointless.

Lets hope the FA do something about Danny Guthrie's tackle on Craig Fagan, horrendous tackle which has fractured Fagan's leg, won't hold my breath that he'll get punished further mind you.....

[marky No.1]

The fact of the matter is that it was a terrible decision, John Terry wasn't even the last man, it was not a 'dangerous' tackle which could have caused serious injury!

Vidic was sent off for two yellows, rightly so as well, so any comparisons between the two are completely pointless.

Lets hope the FA do something about Danny Guthrie's tackle on Craig Fagan, horrendous tackle which has fractured Fagan's leg, won't hold my breath that he'll get punished further mind you.....

Yes that WAS brutal

http://www.football.virginmedia.com/pag ... Id=3086669

on 4 min 20 sec

[shrimper]

The fact of the matter is that it was a terrible decision, John Terry wasn't even the last man, it was not a 'dangerous' tackle which could have caused serious injury!

Halsey didn't send him off for 'being the last man' - and the 'last man' phrase doesn't appear anywhere in the laws of the game at all.
The wording is denying an 'obvious goalscoring opportunity' with a foul. That doesn't mean it would 'definitely' have been a goal, just that there was obviously a good chance of the player scoring had the foul not occurred.
Jo had got clear of Terry and, though Carvalho was, by the time he fell, next to him, when the challenge was initiated, Jo was away (and with Robinho in support). It was a definite 'opportunity'.

But that's all completely irrelevant because that wasn't what Halsey quoted as his reason. He used 'serious foul play' one definition of which - in the laws of the game - is the use of excessive force with a 'potential' to cause injury. The challenge used force which was more excessive than was needed to make a legitimate tackle and, as Terry virtually fell on top of him, there was - in my opinion - clear 'potential' to cause injury.
Doesn't have to actually cause injury, just needs to have the potential to, after excessive force has been used.

In my view Halsey would have been justified in using either of these laws to send him off.



Vidic was sent off for two yellows, rightly so as well, so any comparisons between the two are completely pointless.

Lets hope the FA do something about Danny Guthrie's tackle on Craig Fagan, horrendous tackle which has fractured Fagan's leg, won't hold my breath that he'll get punished further mind you..... :shock:

I agree with you on both these points. Comparisons between different fouls and their punishments are only relevant in terms of judging 'consistency' across various decisions. One decision doesn't make another one right or wrong.

Each decision should be judged ONLY against the laws of the game in each case. In this case I think Halsey got it right (though, personally I'd have opted for the 'denying a goalscoring opportunity' justification) and the FA, particularly with regard to the recent 'Respect' initiative, should, in my opinion, have upheld it.

I wish also that TV coverage would have, on hand, a referee at each live game to give the actual wording of the laws of the game in these circumstances. They keep banging on about 'the last man' and it doesn't appear anywhere.

The advice note to refs from FIFA mentions the position of other players (team-mates and opponents) as a way of deciding whether or not there is a goalscoring opportunity - but nowhere does it specify that the offender has to be the 'last man'.

[Heysham_Shrimp]

Disgraceful and predictable that Terry would be successful with his appeal.

When you think back to Mr T and his accidental high kick against Rochdale and Dave Artell's red card against Posh. I know we didn't appeal against Mr T's red card but not much chance that it would have been successful.

[Neil G]

Disgraceful and predictable that Terry would be successful with his appeal.

TOSH

[morecambe mick]

Disgraceful and predictable that Terry would be successful with his appeal.

TOSH

He's in Benidorm, and I don't think he likes Terry anyway

[DTSJim]

Halsey's been demoted to refereeing Shrewsbury's game because of that 'wrong' decision according to SSN.

Never doubted the appeal would succeed, despite the fact that he dragged the man down when he had a clear run at goal.

[Number 1]

Halsey's been demoted to refereeing Shrewsbury's game because of that 'wrong' decision according to SSN.

Never doubted the appeal would succeed, despite the fact that he dragged the man down when he had a clear run at goal.

He's not been demoted, just been allocated a tense local league 2 derby , just like he was last season when he did the MFC v Accy game, and when Alan Wiley did the Accy v MFC game, and when Phil Dowd did the Chester v MFC game...

Still, why let the truth get in the way of a good story.

As for Terry, Tuesday September 16th 2008. The day that the Football Association officially condoned cheating.

Makes me sick.

[shrimper]

And furthermore...

From the FA's own appeals procedure document:

"When is The FA prevented from taking action?
FIFA guidelines aimed at avoiding the “re-refereeing” of matches generally
prevent The FA from taking disciplinary action on incidents which are seen and
dealt with at the time by the match officials (this includes taking no action). As a
general rule, if the match officials see an incident and have jurisdiction to take
action, The FA cannot act retrospectively."

[rebus]

I take it that was your email ,they have just read out on skysports Glen?
It seem to have a familiar ring to it
and was signed Glen Cooper

[Neil G]

It was a yellow card offence, nothing more. Maybe the dislike of John Terry and Chelsea is clouding judgement here, any neutral could see he wasn't the last defender, the incident took place nearer the half way line than Petr Cech's goal and how the legs of Jo a big premiership striker gave way like that after a just a wee tap on the tummy is very debatable

[shrimper]

It was a yellow card offence, nothing more. Maybe the dislike of John Terry and Chelsea is clouding judgement here, any neutral could see he wasn't the last defender, the incident took place nearer the half way line than Petr Cech's goal and how the legs of Jo a big premiership striker gave way like that after a just a wee tap on the tummy is very debatable

Neil I have no particular dislike of either the team nor the player. The 'last defender' phrase isn't part of any FA Law, the words just don't appear. There is an advice note on the law that relates to sending people off for 'denying a clear goalscoring opportunity' which says a ref, in making his decision, may take into account where the offence takes place and the position of other players.
In my view, had Terry not fouled him, he'd have had a clear run to goal, with Robinho in support. Carvalho was slightly behind him when Terry made the challenge but had caught up as Jo fell to ground. It was - again, in my view - at least a clear 'opportunity'.

BUT - that's all irrelevant. Halsey used 'serious foul play' as his justification which, in the wording of the law of the game, means a challenge that uses excessive force and has the potential to injure. Now you can debate that, but again in my view, THAT is not the point either (on looking at the FA appeal procedures).

The ref made a decision which was in his jurisdiction to make and the guidance clearly says that the 'norm' should be for that to be the end of the matter.

If you rescind an appeal merely because someone doesn't agree with a ref's reasonable interpretation (and the ensuing debate has shown that there are plenty who agree with him, so it's not a clear cut, definite 'mistake') then it opens the FA up to appeals for a huge range of decisions.

In my mind it should only be things like 'mistaken identity' that are exceptional enough for the FA to go against the FIFA guidance about not 're-refereeing' decisions that refs make (and which they then stick to, when asked if they think they made a mistake).

[Neil G]

I caught a glenfish today, he never even noticed the wink, just took the lot

[shrimper]

I caught a glenfish today, he never even noticed the wink, just took the lot

I did notice the wink, just thought it was meaning 'I know, really, that it was a bit more than a tap on the tummy'

But..... okay you got me.

[ezz]

It was a professional foul, you can see Terry purposely rugby tackles him to the floor after Jo skips past him. How can they change that decision, oh wait because their all probably receiving a big fat cheque from a certain Russian billionaire. Not only that Halsey is not reffing a league 2 match, because he refused to change his decision after being told by Hackett to change it.......what a joke!

[Neil G]

I caught a glenfish today, he never even noticed the wink, just took the lot

I did notice the wink, just thought it was meaning 'I know, really, that it was a bit more than a tap on the tummy'

But..... okay you got me.

I did like Chelsea as a lad ( Osgood, Bonetti, Hollins & Charlie Cooke days) but don't really care much for them or any other premiership team these days to be honest (not even the ones like Spurs and the other lower end clubs) Would rather watch Morecambe any day, it means much more, still my brain won't compute why some would think Abramovich gave a cheque to the FA to get this outcome or that it was "predictable and disgusting" that is just utter tosh. I wish Man Utd fans wouldn't take Fergie so seriously when he's clearly making mischief

[Plain Peter]

The game had stopped because of the foul.
So is this not one of those situations where an instant video replay could be used to aid the referee in making the correct decision?

[HALMA 1983]

Had Carvalho not been where he was when the incident occured then yes Terry should have been sent off for a 'Professional foul' but he wasn't the last man so in real terms it only warrants a Yellow.
That Newcastle Guthrie incident was nothing short of thuggery, the likes of which I haven't seen since Lee McEvilly was playing for accy and should be met with a long ban from the F.A, they have to be consistant in this or other budding 'Joey Bartons' will emerge.
As for Man utd, truth is when I seen Ferguson complaining about Terry being let off it made it more obvious he's bricking it after already losing to the scousers and coming up against an even stronger side who'll want it as much as liverpool if not more, looking forward to seeing that sour scot get his comeuppence especially after all his whinning about Madrid coming in for Ronaldo then doing the exact same thing to Spurs with Berbacrap, talk about Double standards!
I really hope Chelski thrash em

[Joel Ninety]

Terry did actually swing a full leg at Jo's knees before he wrestled him down. But you know, whatever.

And all this "reel em in" stuff that keeps getting posted on SVs is just covering up a lack of argument skills.

[shrimper]

Had Carvalho not been where he was when the incident occured then yes Terry should have been sent off for a 'Professional foul' but he wasn't the last man so in real terms it only warrants a Yellow.

OOoooh! go on, then......

He doesn't have to be the 'last man' (yawn). Imagine a striker on the penalty spot just about to take a shot. A defender hauls him down and prevents him from doing so. Red, right? Then imagine there's three other defenders standing on the dead ball line, between the post and the edge of the six yard box - same situation with the striker and the defender that hauls him down. He's not the last man, because there are three others there - but it's still a goalscoring opportunity that he's denied so it's still a red card.

Now look at the Terry incident. When Jo hits the ground, yes, Carvalho's right there. But when Terry starts to foul him, Carvalho is behind Jo and a bit to the side. Had Terry not made the foul, Jo would have been clear on goal - bit more running and then it's a one-on-one with the keeper (and with Robinho in support).

Again, that's not the point cos Halsey didn't rely on the 'denying a goalscoring opportunity' justification anyway - though I think that's probably why he took his card out to start with.
I think that in all the furore and with Carvalho, by that time, right in his face he thought the 'serious foul play' would stick better. I think either would have done but there you go.

Right, you got me again, don't care.

[Neil G]

But you know, whatever.

And all this "reel em in" stuff that keeps getting posted on SVs is just covering up a lack of argument skills.

Argument ! What argument ? It's a discussion "But you know, whatever" very skilled indeed

[ezz]

Fact is you see terry clearly purposely wrap his arm around Jo because he knows that Jo would go on to a probably goal scoring opportunity....hence ,blatent professional foul.
But Halsey saw the attempted kick and rugby tackle and deemed it as serious foul play and because he wouldn't change his mind with Hackett's persuasion he's now reffing in league 2 next week......what does that tell you about the 'chief' referee.

[Neil G]

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/sport/foo ... -card.html