Has been charged by the FA for using foul and abusive language after the Reading game that involved the phantom goal incident.
They were discussing it on Talksport last night and I was surprised that nearly all the people on there thought the FA were wrong to charge him.
Am I the only person that thinks the FA were right? Surely abusing the ref is wrong no matter what the circumstances and the FA would be condoning what he did by not charging him.
Just wondered what others thought.
0
Comments
i cant believe the FA have the balls to do this they, should have phoned Aidy at home and advised him of his future behaviour in private, appologised for putting an absolute eijit in charge of his game as lino and ref, told him we will replay the game as if watford failed to go up due to 3 points they wouldnt be able live with their inept decision and training of a lino, promised him in the future all lino's will be explained to that the ball must cross the goal line for it to be a goal not the by line.
the footballs governing body in all countries and especially here need dismissing and corrupt and incompetant bafoons removed from footie forthwith.
bet he gets fined more than the croats for racism
how would it be come a free for all, yes speak to him but to be charged is ridiculous
the ref should never ref again and the lino be banned for ever if aidy gets charged
Edit - it's Boro vs. WBA
shows how much the fa care about football protecting their man to the hilt he should have atleast been suspended
how would it be come a free for all, yes speak to him but to be charged is ridiculous
the ref should never ref again and the lino be banned for ever if aidy gets charged[/quote]
Where do you draw the line, when does a decision become so bad as to justify calling a ref every name under the sun?
I think that T has got it right, the circumstances can be taken into account when they decide what the punishment is but to not charge him would be wrong imo.
I wouldn't have maintained by composure, and i'd have abused the ref aswell, but i'd also expect to be charged by the FA.
I guess the only way i can draw a metaphor from our civillian lives is if the police had made a cock up that was so monumental that you blew your fuse and abused them you'd get nicked and probably charged. You'd also probably be let off with a tiny fine and a warning about your future conduct. You know you shouldn't have abused them but it happened.
And the ref was suspended for a game after the incident he was supposed to ref a game in the league cup midweek.
.............
If they are going by the letter of the law then I can understand why the FA should punish him, but I wonder if they'll be consistent and fine all players/managers who swear at the match officials? Somehow I doubt it...
Nobody likes to see a borderline midget with no neck jumping up and down shouting and swearing regardless of provocation.
He has to be charged publicly.
But any penalty has to take into account the mitigating circumstances - and so the FA are walking a tightrope here.
Every player and every fan in the country will empathise with Boothroyd here; it was a crime against his team and the world has seen it with their own eyes - and, of course, just about everyone would have reacted in the same way.
The FA are in a no win position. The best they can do publicly is to slap Boothroyd's wrists.
Hit him hard ..... then the FA will be hit by barrage of abuse and derision themselves from all quarters.
And rightfully so.
"Ref, ref what are you doing that was never a goal!"
"Yes it was my assistant saw it cross the line!"
"Then he needs his eyes tested as the tv feed proves it got as close as I did to crossing the goal line!"
"It is a goal!"
"Look at the f**king monitor!"
"The goal stands and you may be able to see better from the stand."
"C**T!!!!"
You cannot excuse the language but understand how it came about, respect my arse, they do not deserve it when they cannot get off their school masterly throne. I know the ref cannot throw his assistant to the wolves, but other than G Poll when has one ever admitted they were wrong and apologised.
The FA should admonish Boothroyd for his language but do so in a way that he has no hearing but instead faces a suspended sentence.
Once they get him in the dock, they can give him a telling-off & warn him about his future conduct. The circumstances will be taken into account and he'll probably get off with slapped wrists.
as for the lino how can he ever be trusted again as soon as a dubious decsion comes along like a rebound off the bar what is he going to do shite himself and make a wrong decision can you imagine the hoo ha if the ball hits the line and doesnt go in and he says it did cross the line,
you can bet your life he will say it never crossed play on how can that be acceptable.
if your going to charge aidy they should publically be charged with profesional incompetance
The rules state he should be charged so he should be. however the punishment should take account of the exceptionally provocative circumstances that led to the outburst. The equivalent of a conditional discharge if it was a criminal court. that is what judges are meant to do - "judge" and the old buffers on the FA are the footballing equivalent of judges.
We are only having this debate because historically the FA and football authorities in general have bent over backwards to fawn over the "big" clubs and let their managers and players off. EG John Terry.
We all know Sir Alex wouldn't be charged if he had done what Boothroyd did but two wrongs don't make a right.
I have every sympathy for Boothroyd but while we talk about the standards of officiating, the standards of behaviour have to be equally upheld, Boothroyd overstepped the line and had to be charged.
Just unfortunate that it was in the same week that Ferdinand was photod going nose to nose with a referee and bawling him out, while his team incurred 7 cautions and the FA does virtually eff all about it.
After being sent of a couple of times even the thickest of players might start to get the message!