Vardy appeal rejected.

[China Black]

[Milo]

4 hours ago, Manwell Pablo said:

Its two footed, it's a foul, takes the ball doesn't matter, takes the man doesn't matter, misses both doesn't matter, two feet = foul

Nope...

Rojo?

[Milo]

1 hour ago, Danny Clender said:

but Ref's need help

Not sure they do, tbh. They just need to be better. I don't mind one or two bad calls, as it's part of the game,  but the clown on Saturday was so bad that he nearly incited a riot! 

 

There are 4 of them, it's not just one man making the decisions.

 

Video evidence is an idea so terrible that it doesn't bear thinking about. Ball over the line is fine, cos its measurable. But take Vardys tackle...video evidence wouldn't help at all. Some people say red card, some yellow and some say good tackle - completely subjective. Simpson penalty...deliberate or not..? Again it would be pointless referring it to a video ref.

 

In the name of all things holy please don't support the introduction of this.

[Always Next Year]

I wonder if the FA will fine or ban Barkley after almost breaking the guys leg in the Liverpool game, only got a yellow.

 Vardy gets a red for clipping the guy who then makes a meal of it .

Just hope we get the tosspot of a ref down at the King Power soon and realy make his day.

Stoke also have it coming to them in the return match.

 

we will have our day.

[Harry - LCFC]

3 hours 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 !! 

Speak for yourself. I'd be saying nothing of the sort.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

43 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

Not surprised by the FA decision. But interested to see what they will do about Barkleys terrible tackle on Henderson last night.

Probably fvck all let's be honest

thats the fvcked up thing about it all

[Guest]

4 hours ago, ImBlue said:

Vardy serves 3 games for getting the ball and none if the player. Shelvey 5 games for racial abuse  

 

might as as well been racist  

 

Don't worry, Jonathan Liew is still banging that drum

[TAFKA Castroneves]

It's crazy but i'm really starting to think the FA have got it properly in for us now. Firstly the rule changes in post last season to "clamp down" on grappling and holding - which really affected our more physical defending style, and we all knew Vardy was never having this card overturned - but even worse is the overall performance of the ref for that game, nothing.

 

The irony is we last season drew more attention to the Premier League (came along at the right time) and no doubt helped in expanding the game - especially in the States - but the bosses really didn't want us to win, we embarressed them and all their money with pure passion and desire.

 

I'm wondering if some people up in the FA are on the payroll from the big clubs - we all know how corrupt FIFA has become, surely it's time to consider with a multi-billion pound football league in our home country that someone or someones are personally profiteriting in some way here. Pity we'll never see an investigation, we should.

 

 

[st albans fox]

really? We arent a threat to the big boys  this season.

 

i think this conspiracy theory stuff should be left to the Sunderlands of this world 

 

we know what we are. Etc etc

[WigstonWanderer]

Just had a quick look at the FA Appeals procedure, and I think I can see the problem. 

 

It seems that the appeal criteria are weighted towards whether the ref made a reasonable decision at the time rather then whether the decision was actually correct with hindsight. It is therefore more about the ref not about whether the player is being correctly punished for what actually happened.

 

This seems to me to be all wrong. The appeal should be all about whether, with all the evidence now available, the decision was actually correct. It should not be about whether the ref made a reasonable decision at the time with his restricted, time-limited view of the incident. In this sense, overturning a ref's decision should not in itself reflect badly on him. It should only be about whether justice is being done for the player and club.

 

In my view there should be a seperate disciplinary procedure for poor refereeing, but the two aspects (fair treatment of the player, and disciplinary action against poor refereeing) should be quite seperate.

 

Finally, I haven't been able to find out anything about who sits on the FA Appeals committee. Surely this should be an independent body. If not, the FA are acting as the lawmaker, policeman, judge and jury, a complete recipe for corruption.

[fuchsntf]

6 hours ago, AjcW said:

Oh completely! Just wanted to look on the bright side  

Congratulations...Mods  give this guy a special star.

 

First time on this forum...some happy poster trying to look on the bright side...My hero   

[David Hankey]

Well that's that. Looking on the bright side I seem to recall others scoring goals when Vardy was suspended last season.

[Hume]

Understand why the appeal was rejected, what makes me furious is when Rojo and Barkely get away with yellow cards for tackles that were far more dangerous. What a ridiculous system where a contentious red can get a 3 game ban and a stonewall red gets a yellow card with no chance of an increased punishment.

 

Also disagree that if he mistimes it it's a leg breaker. It wasn't studs up when he challenged for the ball so at worst he's getting kicked hard with laces and then taken out by the follow through, but not in a leg breaking way.

[Long Eaton Fox]

59 minutes ago, TAFKA Castroneves said:

It's crazy but i'm really starting to think the FA have got it properly in for us now. Firstly the rule changes in post last season to "clamp down" on grappling and holding - which really affected our more physical defending style, and we all knew Vardy was never having this card overturned - but even worse is the overall performance of the ref for that game, nothing.

 

The irony is we last season drew more attention to the Premier League (came along at the right time) and no doubt helped in expanding the game - especially in the States - but the bosses really didn't want us to win, we embarressed them and all their money with pure passion and desire.

 

I'm wondering if some people up in the FA are on the payroll from the big clubs - we all know how corrupt FIFA has become, surely it's time to consider with a multi-billion pound football league in our home country that someone or someones are personally profiteriting in some way here. Pity we'll never see an investigation, we should.

 

 

You're not crazy. Maybe the FA (**** All) thought a nice little adventure for a small club then it will all implode. It didn't and now it's payback time

[Long Eaton Fox]

55 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Just had a quick look at the FA Appeals procedure, and I think I can see the problem. 

 

It seems that the appeal criteria are weighted towards whether the ref made a reasonable decision at the time rather then whether the decision was actually correct with hindsight. It is therefore more about the ref not about whether the player is being correctly punished for what actually happened.

 

This seems to me to be all wrong. The appeal should be all about whether, with all the evidence now available, the decision was actually correct. It should not be about whether the ref made a reasonable decision at the time with his restricted, time-limited view of the incident. In this sense, overturning a ref's decision should not in itself reflect badly on him. It should only be about whether justice is being done for the player and club.

 

In my view there should be a seperate disciplinary procedure for poor refereeing, but the two aspects (fair treatment of the player, and disciplinary action against poor refereeing) should be quite seperate.

 

Finally, I haven't been able to find out anything about who sits on the FA Appeals committee. Surely this should be an independent body. If not, the FA are acting as the lawmaker, policeman, judge and jury, a complete recipe for corruption.

Totally agree

[AjcW]

37 minutes ago, fuchsntf said:

Congratulations...Mods  give this guy a special star.

 

First time on this forum...some happy poster trying to look on the bright side...My hero   

 

[TAFKA Castroneves]

54 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Just had a quick look at the FA Appeals procedure, and I think I can see the problem. 

 

It seems that the appeal criteria are weighted towards whether the ref made a reasonable decision at the time rather then whether the decision was actually correct with hindsight. It is therefore more about the ref not about whether the player is being correctly punished for what actually happened.

 

This seems to me to be all wrong. The appeal should be all about whether, with all the evidence now available, the decision was actually correct. It should not be about whether the ref made a reasonable decision at the time with his restricted, time-limited view of the incident. In this sense, overturning a ref's decision should not in itself reflect badly on him. It should only be about whether justice is being done for the player and club.

 

In my view there should be a seperate disciplinary procedure for poor refereeing, but the two aspects (fair treatment of the player, and disciplinary action against poor refereeing) should be quite seperate.

 

Finally, I haven't been able to find out anything about who sits on the FA Appeals committee. Surely this should be an independent body. If not, the FA are acting as the lawmaker, policeman, judge and jury, a complete recipe for corruption.

Interesting information at the end there mate,

 

We all know there is a crazy amount of money involved in the Premier League nowadays, we've all heard about the "Big 6" club holding talks - especially over the last year - mostly in order to expand revenue for themselves, we've potentially made a lot of enemies at a time when Manchester United (for one example - the biggest "franchise" in the sports world) are looking like they might still find it difficult to get back into the Champions League - now ask yourself this, is there a chance that it's in the FA's interest for (like i said - the biggest sports franchise in the world) to be regulary in the Champions League? I would argue yes as it could line their pockets further to have that happen - and we're not niave, money is everything in this world.

 

My link between Vardy's decision and the changes at the start of the season isn't strong - i agree - however think of all the money we could have taken away from them last season if there WAS something going on,

all our games ended up on Sundays...remember that? Yet, we still did it - and as a lot of you who were there reported - the FA did not look happy being in Leicester to give the Premier League trophy.

[WigstonWanderer]

Apparently the Appeal board is supposed to be independent, but I wonder how independent they are in practice.

[Donut]

47 minutes ago, TAFKA Castroneves said:

Interesting information at the end there mate,

 

We all know there is a crazy amount of money involved in the Premier League nowadays, we've all heard about the "Big 6" club holding talks - especially over the last year - mostly in order to expand revenue for themselves, we've potentially made a lot of enemies at a time when Manchester United (for one example - the biggest "franchise" in the sports world) are looking like they might still find it difficult to get back into the Champions League - now ask yourself this, is there a chance that it's in the FA's interest for (like i said - the biggest sports franchise in the world) to be regulary in the Champions League? I would argue yes as it could line their pockets further to have that happen - and we're not niave, money is everything in this world.

 

My link between Vardy's decision and the changes at the start of the season isn't strong - i agree - however think of all the money we could have taken away from them last season if there WAS something going on,

all our games ended up on Sundays...remember that? Yet, we still did it - and as a lot of you who were there reported - the FA did not look happy being in Leicester to give the Premier League trophy.

This whole conspiracy stuff is laughable.

 

It was a decision that could have been interpreted as a red. The word is COULD have. Some referees would have given it as a red, some not.

 

There was a jumping action involved. Thats a matter of fact. Most referees would assess that as reckless and out of control. So whilst frustrating, the decision is understandable.

 

The panel have agreed with the assessment of the referee on the day.

 

Its really something to move on from. I honestly wouldnt consider this red card decision a blantant shocker. Other referees would have given red for that.

[Alex_LCFC]

If rojo hadnt ofbhad those 2 incidents and pawson bein involved in the lastest one if them. Then I dont believe there would of been a red card in the first place 

[Dan]

2 hours ago, TAFKA Castroneves said:

It's crazy but i'm really starting to think the FA have got it properly in for us now. Firstly the rule changes in post last season to "clamp down" on grappling and holding - which really affected our more physical defending style, and we all knew Vardy was never having this card overturned - but even worse is the overall performance of the ref for that game, nothing.

 

The irony is we last season drew more attention to the Premier League (came along at the right time) and no doubt helped in expanding the game - especially in the States - but the bosses really didn't want us to win, we embarressed them and all their money with pure passion and desire.

 

I'm wondering if some people up in the FA are on the payroll from the big clubs - we all know how corrupt FIFA has become, surely it's time to consider with a multi-billion pound football league in our home country that someone or someones are personally profiteriting in some way here. Pity we'll never see an investigation, we should.

Agree entirely with the bold bit. I can't say for sure if the game is corrupt but I have no idea how people can confidently say it isn't.

 

That flurry of yellows on Saturday was absolutely ridiculous. With the amount of markets you can bet on now, who is to say that it hasn't been fixed in some way for a high number of cards? For example.

[Dan]

2 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Just had a quick look at the FA Appeals procedure, and I think I can see the problem. 

 

It seems that the appeal criteria are weighted towards whether the ref made a reasonable decision at the time rather then whether the decision was actually correct with hindsight. It is therefore more about the ref not about whether the player is being correctly punished for what actually happened.

 

This seems to me to be all wrong. The appeal should be all about whether, with all the evidence now available, the decision was actually correct. It should not be about whether the ref made a reasonable decision at the time with his restricted, time-limited view of the incident. In this sense, overturning a ref's decision should not in itself reflect badly on him. It should only be about whether justice is being done for the player and club.

 

In my view there should be a seperate disciplinary procedure for poor refereeing, but the two aspects (fair treatment of the player, and disciplinary action against poor refereeing) should be quite seperate.

 

Finally, I haven't been able to find out anything about who sits on the FA Appeals committee. Surely this should be an independent body. If not, the FA are acting as the lawmaker, policeman, judge and jury, a complete recipe for corruption.

Which is an utterly ludicrous concept and totally defeats the object of even having an appeals process.

[Kendal Fox]

3 hours ago, Clever Fox said:

Not surprised by the FA decision. But interested to see what they will do about Barkleys terrible tackle on Henderson last night.

I find it interesting that the media are ultra quick to push this cover story down our throats that Barkley apologised to Henderson so that basically makes it ok??!!!?

The same media who were simply frothing at the mouth when they were running stories on Vardy's red card and are now frothing at the mouth when informing us that his appeal was rejected and he'll serve the 3 match ban!!??? The bias and lack of honesty is staggering...

[Dan]

1 hour ago, TAFKA Castroneves said:

Interesting information at the end there mate,

 

We all know there is a crazy amount of money involved in the Premier League nowadays, we've all heard about the "Big 6" club holding talks - especially over the last year - mostly in order to expand revenue for themselves, we've potentially made a lot of enemies at a time when Manchester United (for one example - the biggest "franchise" in the sports world) are looking like they might still find it difficult to get back into the Champions League - now ask yourself this, is there a chance that it's in the FA's interest for (like i said - the biggest sports franchise in the world) to be regulary in the Champions League? I would argue yes as it could line their pockets further to have that happen - and we're not niave, money is everything in this world.

 

My link between Vardy's decision and the changes at the start of the season isn't strong - i agree - however think of all the money we could have taken away from them last season if there WAS something going on,

all our games ended up on Sundays...remember that? Yet, we still did it - and as a lot of you who were there reported - the FA did not look happy being in Leicester to give the Premier League trophy.

That Charlie Stillitano article has made me enormously cynical about football, even more so than I was before. That was someone who is working within the sport admitting that he wants the biggest clubs in there because of the revenue they generate. The entire set-up is completely ripe for corruption. It really pisses me off when people laugh off the possibility.

[TAFKA Castroneves]

31 minutes ago, Donut said:

This whole conspiracy stuff is laughable.

 

It was a decision that could have been interpreted as a red. The word is COULD have. Some referees would have given it as a red, some not.

 

There was a jumping action involved. Thats a matter of fact. Most referees would assess that as reckless and out of control. So whilst frustrating, the decision is understandable.

 

The panel have agreed with the assessment of the referee on the day.

 

Its really something to move on from. I honestly wouldnt consider this red card decision a blantant shocker. Other referees would have given red for that.

 

Not everyone's cup of tea - i agree, and to be honest i went off on a bit of a loose string in tying it to the Vardy card scenario - a lot of these differing situations just build up together after a while,

Personally I don't think it's all "linked" the bookings - aka the FA sent out a ref to screw us against Stoke, I don't believe in that extreme of a position   - yet at least!

 

All i'm saying is think about the money, which clubs have been the "face" of the Premier League over the years, which clubs are raking in more money worldwide for the Premier League? - certainly wasn't Leicester with the greatest of respect to our club - and why are 6 clubs that describe themselves as the "top 6" of the Premier League suddenly having collective meetings as of last year? There is a recipe being created currently for corruption to shine - and there are more signs hinting towards it currently happening or potentially happening, is this a sport or WWE? - where the biggest drawing talents are on the top of the card because they draw the most money?

 

Not saying it IS happening, just saying who's going to be the ones watching the FA to ensure it doesn't? it's always come across as a very closed company - and that doesn't help.

6 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

That Charlie Stillitano article has made me enormously cynical about football, even more so than I was before. That was someone who is working within the sport admitting that he wants the biggest clubs in there because of the revenue they generate. The entire set-up is completely ripe for corruption. It really pisses me off when people laugh off the possibility.

Well said, exactly another reason why we need to keep our eyes open.