Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Matt

Vardy appeal rejected.

Recommended Posts

Posted
4 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

@Manwell Pablo had this spot on all along.

Its no surprise whatsoever.

Does it now mean Vardy gets 4 matches ban?

No.

 

Rob Tanner has said the FA obviously agree it wasn't as frivolous appeal and had a case.

 

Which as i've already questioned, if it wasn't a frivolous appeal and it had a case they FA must have agreed somewhat, but not enough to go against their tin god.

Posted

Ridiculous decision that's almost as ridiculous as Pawsons performance. Anyway on the brightside a couple of players that are knocking on the door may get some more time on the pitch,

Posted
16 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

He also said it was a red ..................

 

he wants to help pawson get away from the heat but he said on BT that it was a red. 

 

Didn't hear that to be honest then why would he say (we) Ref's are always under scrutiny and make mistakes which can influence games and then says Pawson should not be officiating the Liv Man City game? the booking of Pieters did not influence the game the red card did.

Posted
11 minutes ago, Twitcher said:

It can't be if a retrospective panel have assessed it and still arrived at it being a red. Personally I think it was harsh, but you can't argue it was defo. wrong or it would have been overturned without debate.  People wouldn't be describing it as an "orange" if it was defo. wrong.

People? You mean the selected people you want to quote.

 

Many have said it isn't a foul, or that a yellow was enough, including experts/pundits/ex referees. 

 

Its divided opinion, and the FA have decided that there isn't grounds the overturn it. Don't confuse that would 'we believe it's a red card offence' they probably don't.

 

therefore people have every right to feel aggrieved. Is there any pundit/ex ref etc that has said it's a nailed on red? Genuine question? 

Posted
26 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

He also said it was a red ..................

 

he wants to help pawson get away from the heat but he said on BT that it was a red. 

So much a red and a good decision that he should be dropped for his next fixture.

 

surely after the united/palace game, if he agreed with his decisions in our game, then he's got himself back on track? 

 

Inadvertantly contradicting himself. 

Posted

Bit typical of the Fa etc not wanting to put more pressure on pawsons incompetent week of trying to referee !!

ifnore the problem and it might go away thoughts of the fa !!

absoulutely obsurd decision to reject the appeal fooking dinosaurs !!

Posted

Bah. It really is the biggest issue with the sport right now; inconsistent rulings and decisions. It is so frustrating and I really can't wait for a proper video system to at least help out a little. Mind though that the NFL for example even with video and challenge systems still has loads of debatable decisions. 

 

Hopefully we galvanise from this like we did with after the Arsenal (Simpson red) and West Ham (Vardy red) games last season. At least we have plenty attacking options... 

Posted
1 hour ago, TheUltimateWinner said:

Agree that them not adding an extra game speaks volumes, its as if they've gone 'Yeah you've got a point it wasn't a definite red but...'

They only add matches to the ban (I think) if the appeal is outrageous. For example. If Barkley got a red for hendo's tackle and he tried to appeal they (the fa) will increase the ban. But, with vardy is like "we get that it might be unintentional but you could have injured the other player. And that was a fair red"

Posted

Might sound against the majority however from my view I can totally understand why it wasn't rescinded. 

Posted

Siege mentality now, crowd and players aggrieved - channeled aggression on Boxing Day. Expect a high tempo game, just what we require.

Posted
27 minutes ago, jamesmilner said:

 The truth is if that tackle was on Vardy , i and all on here would be shouting for a red . its just the truth !! 

In real time it didn't even  look like a foul never mind a red. 

 

I dare say vardy has had to deal with similar last ditch tackles by opponents like that but I've never complained all that much about it. 

 

That sending off and  the decision to stand over it is a farce. 

 

 

Posted

I can't for the life of me see how the argument that, "because it looked bad in real time, that's why Pawson made the decison and the FA have upheld it" is acceptable??!

In that case, it completely contradicts Sadio Mane's straight red card (v Stoke in March) being rescinded. Lee Mason in real time thought it was "serious foul play" and sent Mane off. Yet, on appeal Southampton benefitted from retrospective, slow mo replays showing that Mane unintentionally butted Pieters and it was enough to get the 3 match ban quashed immediately. Forget the fact that Mane was also out of control and did not get the ball?!! Why are the FA contradicting the criteria used succesfully by Southampton??!

How is this anything other than Vardy yet again being held to a different standard?? Also, looks like he was starting to come on, what with the hat-trick v Man City.

Feels like the FA are still punishing us for having the audacity to win the league.

Posted
1 hour ago, Danny Clender said:

Great to read the positives of this outcome listed, you can only hope for the best.

I'm glad it puts refereeing decisions in the spotlight.

Video Replays are coming, like it or not, and in 10 years time, and hopefully much much sooner, people will say "Remember when we didn't have video replays?"

Cricket, NFL, Rugby, Tennis, NBA, F1, MLB, Ice Hockey all have video review based decisions or appeals and work perfectly well.

The decision to leave them out football is simply archaic.

 

 

The problem with Video Replays is who makes the decision?

Is it one person or a three person panel with majority rule, it doesn't mean

the right decision will me made, it's subjective unlike goal line technology.

We can't even make a definitive decision on a largely biased LCFC forum!

Posted
1 hour ago, Twitcher said:

So all those that were going nuts on Saturday and saying it was defo wrong.........

It was wrong. Just because the fa are useless doesn't change that.

 

absolute joke, it wasn't even a foul. Pushed over but by the time he reaches there it's just one footed and with the top of his boot, gets the ball and none of the man. At best you can argue it starts as a two footed challenge, but he's nowhere near a player at that point.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...