[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]I'm sure the ROI F A know that they have no chance whatsoever of a replay. I suspect that it's as much about political points scoring as anything else.
Eduardo got banned for cheating but when Arsenal appealed and brought an element of doubt into the equation FIFA decided to back down. It was stupid to bring the charge in the first place but, having done so, they have set a precedent. By virtue of the fact that Henry handled the ball not once but twice there can be no doubt of his guilt.
Given the above, I suspect that, if only to save face, Messrs Blatter and Plattini will charge Henry and hand him the same ban as Eduardo was given i.e. two matches.
I agree, the Eduardo incident did set a precedent - even though it was overturned.
But really, I just cannot understand how they can justify handing out a greater punishment for an offence which, even if the referee had seen it during the match, is only punishable by a yellow card under the rules of the game. Can anyone explain this to me?!
[cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Can't really replay it but Henry should get a 5 match ban for his conduct, won't happen though.
But why should he? That's not the rules!
Neither is dragging the ball back into play with your hand.
Actually that IS in the rules, ie if you handle the ball, it's a free-kick (or at least should be). But there's no provision for a 5-match ban in relation to handling the ball.
[cite]Posted By: Si[/cite] But really, I just cannot understand how they can justify handing out a greater punishment for an offence which, even if the referee had seen it during the match, is only punishable by a yellow card under the rules of the game.Can anyone explain this to me?!
How can you justify banning Henry for a deliberate handball that the referee missed when Keane only had a free kick awarded against him for a deliberate handball that the referee spotted?
But Henry's offense was only punishable by a yellow card if the ref had seen it.
And Chizz is right Ormiston - the game has a set of laws that punishes handballs like Henry's: a yellow card for deliberate handball. Not a 5 match ban or whatever. The fact the ref missed it doesn't make the offense any worse or any different, so why should the punishment suddenly change?!
But Henry's offense was only punishable by a yellow card if the ref had seen it.
And Chizz is right Ormiston - the game has a set of laws that punishes handballs like Henry's: a yellow card for deliberate handball. Not a 5 match ban or whatever.The fact the ref missed it doesn't make the offense any worse or any different, so why should the punishment suddenly change?!
Fair enough chaps, I understand what the letter of the law says. but, on the other hand, Henry has just cheated his way to the biggest event in the game with his conduct - are there to be no ramifications for that?
He knows that it was deliberate handball and if UEFA take no action against him, even via a public censure, then they are tacitly giving the green light to others to do the same and also putting themselves in a very tough situation regarding "simulation" of fouls.
If UEFA try and ban a player for diving, like with Eduardo, then the player involved will be entitled to point to the Henry example and ask why he is being punished and Henry was not.
I really hate cheating, the only time I ever threw a punch on a football pitch was when I flicked the ball over my markers head and was through on goal and he basically deliberately punched the ball back to his goalkeeper - and got away with it, thereby completely voiding my once in a lifetime bit of skill!
I saw red, literally and figuratively, because I just could not stand to see someone do that in a game of amateur football, it is totally against the spirit of the game. Mind you, throwing right-handers is a bit out of order too.
[cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Fair enough chaps, I understand what the letter of the law says. but, on the other hand, Henry has just cheated his way to the biggest event in the game with his conduct - are there to be no ramifications for that?
He knows that it was deliberate handball and if UEFA take no action against him, even via a public censure, then they are tacitly giving the green light to others to do the same and also putting themselves in a very tough situation regarding "simulation" of fouls.
If UEFA try and ban a player for diving, like with Eduardo, then the player involved will be entitled to point to the Henry example and ask why he is being punished and Henry was not.
I really hate cheating, the only time I ever threw a punch on a football pitch was when I flicked the ball over my markers head and was through on goal and he basically deliberately punched the ball back to his goalkeeper - and got away with it, thereby completely voiding my once in a lifetime bit of skill!
I saw red, literally and figuratively, because I just could not stand to see someone do that in a game of amateur football, it is totally against the spirit of the game. Mind you, throwing right-handers is a bit out of order too.
Yes do see where you're coming from, Ormiston. That is valid - cheating should have ramifications. I suppose the major difficulty with the whole thing - from Henry's handball, to Eduardo's dive, to the defender in your game who punched it back to his keeper - is that it is very hard to prove a deliberate act of 'cheating'. I know from experience that handling the ball is sometimes (not always, but sometimes) a quite instinctive and reflexive event; it's not planned, it just happens. Henry's handball was deliberate, and although it was a vaguely conscious decision to handball it, i don't think it can be called a conscious decision to cheat, in the true sense of the word. I'm sure that it's a similar story for diving footballers. A split second, barely conscious decision to gain an advantage. I think 'cheating' is too harsh a word for these actions - and so, evidently, does the FA, as it only deems it punishable by a yellow card. They are split second decisions made in high pressure environments.
To provide a contrast: planning, swallowing, and chewing on a blood capsule in order to gain an advantage is definitely cheating, as it was a construed act with considered intentions
I'm sure there is a small part of Henry that wished the ref had seen it straight after the event, because of how he knew the event would tarnish his reputation. This alone would prove that it was a split-second, almost sub-conscious action. Not really cheating - just an offense, like a cyncial foul.
[cite]Posted By: Red_in_SE8[/cite]How can you justify banning Henry for a deliberate handball that the referee missed when Keane only had a free kick awarded against him for a deliberate handball that the referee spotted?
How about this:
If you try to cheat, you should be punished. I think that should go without saying.
If you're stopped from cheating, by the referee or by the other players, then that gets a punishment within the game and you move on.
If you succeed in cheating, and gain a meaningful advantage from it (goal, penalty, free kick close to goal, stop a goal etc), then FIFA can whack you with a massive punishment on the video evidence. 10 games or some other massive punishment. Whetever. They throw the book at you.
So here it goes: if you are stopped by the referee, that gets punished within the game. However, if it's not punished by the ref and you get a massive advantage from it (like last night's goal), you have every incentive to ask the referee to cancel the decision within the match, because if he doesn't, you won't be playing for some time. So players who make a mistake and/or cheat will be much more likely to go up to the referee and get him to change the decision and give him a yellow card because the alternative is much worse. The referee will accept the player's complaints because they'll want him to make the right decision.
Imagine it, C Ronaldo chasing after the referee begging for a yellow card for diving!
1. Henry said - "the ball hit my hand" (twice!!!) - the cheating french tw$$! 2. FIFA would prefer France at the world cup, so they will keep quiet and hope it blows over. 3. I hope the rest of the teams kick lumps out of the froggies come the finals. 4. I think FIFA are scared of using technology (don't know why?) - it works well in Rugby and to a lesser extent in cricket - so in future they will come up with some sort of compromise - probable a ref in each half ?
[quote][cite]Posted By: Si[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Fair enough chaps, I understand what the letter of the law says. but, on the other hand, Henry has just cheated his way to the biggest event in the game with his conduct - are there to be no ramifications for that?
He knows that it was deliberate handball and if UEFA take no action against him, even via a public censure, then they are tacitly giving the green light to others to do the same and also putting themselves in a very tough situation regarding "simulation" of fouls.
If UEFA try and ban a player for diving, like with Eduardo, then the player involved will be entitled to point to the Henry example and ask why he is being punished and Henry was not.
I really hate cheating, the only time I ever threw a punch on a football pitch was when I flicked the ball over my markers head and was through on goal and he basically deliberately punched the ball back to his goalkeeper - and got away with it, thereby completely voiding my once in a lifetime bit of skill!
I saw red, literally and figuratively, because I just could not stand to see someone do that in a game of amateur football, it is totally against the spirit of the game. Mind you, throwing right-handers is a bit out of order too.[/quote]
Yes do see where you're coming from, Ormiston. That is valid - cheating should have ramifications. I suppose the major difficulty with the whole thing - from Henry's handball, to Eduardo's dive, to the defender in your game who punched it back to his keeper - is that it is very hard to prove a deliberate act of 'cheating'. I know from experience that handling the ball is sometimes (not always, but sometimes) a quite instinctive and reflexive event; it's not planned, it just happens. Henry's handball was deliberate, and although it was a vaguely conscious decision to handball it, i don't think it can be called a conscious decision to cheat, in the true sense of the word. I'm sure that it's a similar story for diving footballers. A split second, barely conscious decision to gain an advantage. I think 'cheating' is too harsh a word for these actions - and so, evidently, does the FA, as it only deems it punishable by a yellow card. They are split second decisions made in high pressure environments.
To provide a contrast: planning, swallowing, and chewing on a blood capsule in order to gain an advantage is definitely cheating, as it was a construed act with considered intentions
I'm sure there is a small part of Henry that wished the ref had seen it straight after the event, because of how he knew the event would tarnish his reputation. This alone would prove that it was a split-second, almost sub-conscious action. Not really cheating - just an offense, like a cyncial foul.[/quote]
True enough, I guess Henry's handball was in a kind of greyish area because it would be hard to prove it was absolutely deliberate, certainly not as deliberate as that fat bastard who robbed me at Hall Place in 1993!
Henry only admitted to it after the fact, not at the time - still a cheating french tw$$! He only admitted it due to the fact that it was caught on tv cameras and because of the Irish players reaction/Irish fans reaction! Hand of god my ars$!
Replay? Only if all of the Irish players sign a contract saying they will never dive, cheat, handball, shirt pull etc etc in the future. Fact is, I've heard a number of their players today and they all seem very reluctant to condemn Henry for his actions. This is because they can all imagine themselves doing exactly the same and they prefer to take the easier option of laying full blame at the door of the match officials. I've even heard Michael Vaughan(!) today, refusing to criticise Henry but being quite ready to lay into the referee (you know exactly what view the ref had then do you Michael?). Professional sportsmen these days think so differently from the public and their idea of "fair play" is often far removed from the rest of civilisation!
Of course, as supporters ourselves we sympathise with the Irish fans....but would people have been getting on their high horses quite so much if it had been Robbie Keane handballing with the same outcome thus putting out the French? And don't say an Irishman wouldn't do it because it has nothing to do with nationality and everything to do with the "professional" mindset of today's sportsmen. They're (nearly) all as bad as each other, so I have very little sympathy for players, who would happily cheat their own grandmothers if they thought it meant they'd "win" the game.
IA - I like your idea, very much actually. In principle it does solve anumber of the inherent problems with cheating. There is still the problem with proving 'cheating', as I mentioned in my last post. But that aside, I like your thinking.
And GH - I know you said it. I said since when has it been true
Alas should not be replayed as would be wrong for the game as would open up can of worms for nearly every match re wwas it a pen did ball cross line...did he dive......the Ref and linesmen are there to administer the rules........they failed so why should the game be replayed if they did a bad job ? .......even if we had ref in a tv box watching what could he do......surely it would need the ref to say i was unsighted and then ask...or would the tv ref be able to say mmmm think you dropped a bollock there mate blow up.........think tv refs should only be used when ref is unsighted or in doubt. and they ask for help ......in french game he was not in doubt or linesman unsighted........so even if ref was in tv room what could he do.....
No replay. Thats just plain daft. No ban for Henry. The damage to his rep is good enough. And for those worried about Irish-French relations, fear not. Stood infront of me on the train are two ladies, one Irish, one French & chatting away, even talking about the game. Seem perfectly happy to me.
[cite]Posted By: KBslittlesis[/cite]No replay. Thats just plain daft. No ban for Henry. The damage to his rep is good enough. And for those worried about Irish-French relations, fear not. Stood infront of me on the train are two ladies, one Irish, one French & chatting away, even talking about the game. Seem perfectly happy to me.
But did you see what they did after they got off the train?
[cite]Posted By: KBslittlesis[/cite]No replay. Thats just plain daft. No ban for Henry. The damage to his rep is good enough. And for those worried about Irish-French relations, fear not. Stood infront of me on the train are two ladies, one Irish, one French & chatting away, even talking about the game. Seem perfectly happy to me.
But did you see what they did after they got off the train?
I did, put me in mind of the advice i was giving about you fellas using your laptops instead of watching reality tv ;-)
Henry can't be given a lengthy ban for what was only a yellow card offense.
I think the angle of people's fury is misdirected at Henry. Why aren't the referee and linesmen being questioned for such an obvious mistake?
What's wrong with the following: the referee should be allowed to ask the player whether he committed the offense or not. If Henry admitted it during the game, he gets the yellow, Ireland get the free kick and we play on. If Henry didn't admit to it, and it's later proven he did intentionally handball it, he gets a lengthy ban.
his action has brought the game into disrepute therefore he can be banned.
Salad you are correct--ish. I am the guardian of all things that are good taste on CL. The guardian of all things English and the guardian of my garden. As for the Guardianistas they know that when the revelution comes its Cuba or on a fire on Blackheath for them all. POWER TO (some) OF THE PEOPLE.
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]his action has brought the game into disrepute therefore he can be banned.
Absolutely GH.
And the bottom line is, FIFA can do whatever they damn well please, they can ban him for life if they want to - it's their competition - as we know they even changed the rules for the qualifyers half way through because it suited them.
Henry will probably get away with it, because its France involved.
The referee can only make a decision based on what he or his 2 assistants actually see.
If Henri went up to him straight after and confessed handball, the referee is not permitted to take the word of a player. Once the game is restarted, then the goal will always stand.
As pointed out, handball is only a yellow card offence - but the referee missed 2 separate handball incidents in quick succession. If each had been seen, the referee would have been within rights to issue 2 separate yellow cards in quick succession = red. But purely academic in any case, because neither handball incident was seen/acted on by the referee.
And I've never heard of a yellow issued retrospectively after the game is over, unlike red.
Perhaps the Irish players should have walked off the pitch in protest at the time. The match would have been abandoned, the Ireland FA no doubt censured - and no doubt the score would have been made the result.
But the point would have been made - and FIFA forced to confront the situation.
[cite]Posted By: MrOneLung[/cite]I dont understand all this replay crap.
If a team has a stonewall penalty claim turned down, do they get a replay?
The answer to the above is NO.
We have all benefitted/been shafted by a handball,unseen foul, dive.
Thats life.
Indeed, MK Dons were denied a stonewall penalty on saturday when Christian Dailly handballed in the area, any demands to re-play the game and retrospectively punish Dailly? I thought not...
Then again the referee/his assistant has made at least three bad decisions this season that worked against Charlton - allowing an offside to stand that denied Burton a perfectly acceptable goal vs Southampton, allowing a blatant body check on Rob Elliot for Norwich's last minute equaliser and the non-existent penalty at Carlisle.
It's bad luck on Ireland, I don't think that the referee/his assistant saw the handball, and you can't give a foul you don't see. But as above in sport things have a habit of going full circle, and Tony Cascarino knowingly playing for Ireland when he knew he wasn't qualified is just as bad in my opinion. Should the matches he played in be discounted?
Comments
I agree, the Eduardo incident did set a precedent - even though it was overturned.
But really, I just cannot understand how they can justify handing out a greater punishment for an offence which, even if the referee had seen it during the match, is only punishable by a yellow card under the rules of the game. Can anyone explain this to me?!
;o)
But Henry's offense was only punishable by a yellow card if the ref had seen it.
And Chizz is right Ormiston - the game has a set of laws that punishes handballs like Henry's: a yellow card for deliberate handball. Not a 5 match ban or whatever. The fact the ref missed it doesn't make the offense any worse or any different, so why should the punishment suddenly change?!
He knows that it was deliberate handball and if UEFA take no action against him, even via a public censure, then they are tacitly giving the green light to others to do the same and also putting themselves in a very tough situation regarding "simulation" of fouls.
If UEFA try and ban a player for diving, like with Eduardo, then the player involved will be entitled to point to the Henry example and ask why he is being punished and Henry was not.
I really hate cheating, the only time I ever threw a punch on a football pitch was when I flicked the ball over my markers head and was through on goal and he basically deliberately punched the ball back to his goalkeeper - and got away with it, thereby completely voiding my once in a lifetime bit of skill!
I saw red, literally and figuratively, because I just could not stand to see someone do that in a game of amateur football, it is totally against the spirit of the game. Mind you, throwing right-handers is a bit out of order too.
Yes do see where you're coming from, Ormiston. That is valid - cheating should have ramifications. I suppose the major difficulty with the whole thing - from Henry's handball, to Eduardo's dive, to the defender in your game who punched it back to his keeper - is that it is very hard to prove a deliberate act of 'cheating'. I know from experience that handling the ball is sometimes (not always, but sometimes) a quite instinctive and reflexive event; it's not planned, it just happens. Henry's handball was deliberate, and although it was a vaguely conscious decision to handball it, i don't think it can be called a conscious decision to cheat, in the true sense of the word. I'm sure that it's a similar story for diving footballers. A split second, barely conscious decision to gain an advantage. I think 'cheating' is too harsh a word for these actions - and so, evidently, does the FA, as it only deems it punishable by a yellow card. They are split second decisions made in high pressure environments.
To provide a contrast: planning, swallowing, and chewing on a blood capsule in order to gain an advantage is definitely cheating, as it was a construed act with considered intentions
I'm sure there is a small part of Henry that wished the ref had seen it straight after the event, because of how he knew the event would tarnish his reputation. This alone would prove that it was a split-second, almost sub-conscious action. Not really cheating - just an offense, like a cyncial foul.
How about this:
If you try to cheat, you should be punished. I think that should go without saying.
If you're stopped from cheating, by the referee or by the other players, then that gets a punishment within the game and you move on.
If you succeed in cheating, and gain a meaningful advantage from it (goal, penalty, free kick close to goal, stop a goal etc), then FIFA can whack you with a massive punishment on the video evidence. 10 games or some other massive punishment. Whetever. They throw the book at you.
So here it goes: if you are stopped by the referee, that gets punished within the game. However, if it's not punished by the ref and you get a massive advantage from it (like last night's goal), you have every incentive to ask the referee to cancel the decision within the match, because if he doesn't, you won't be playing for some time. So players who make a mistake and/or cheat will be much more likely to go up to the referee and get him to change the decision and give him a yellow card because the alternative is much worse. The referee will accept the player's complaints because they'll want him to make the right decision.
Imagine it, C Ronaldo chasing after the referee begging for a yellow card for diving!
How does that sound?
2. FIFA would prefer France at the world cup, so they will keep quiet and hope it blows over.
3. I hope the rest of the teams kick lumps out of the froggies come the finals.
4. I think FIFA are scared of using technology (don't know why?) - it works well in Rugby and to a lesser extent in cricket - so in future they will come up with some sort of compromise - probable a ref in each half ?
He knows that it was deliberate handball and if UEFA take no action against him, even via a public censure, then they are tacitly giving the green light to others to do the same and also putting themselves in a very tough situation regarding "simulation" of fouls.
If UEFA try and ban a player for diving, like with Eduardo, then the player involved will be entitled to point to the Henry example and ask why he is being punished and Henry was not.
I really hate cheating, the only time I ever threw a punch on a football pitch was when I flicked the ball over my markers head and was through on goal and he basically deliberately punched the ball back to his goalkeeper - and got away with it, thereby completely voiding my once in a lifetime bit of skill!
I saw red, literally and figuratively, because I just could not stand to see someone do that in a game of amateur football, it is totally against the spirit of the game. Mind you, throwing right-handers is a bit out of order too.[/quote]
Yes do see where you're coming from, Ormiston. That is valid - cheating should have ramifications. I suppose the major difficulty with the whole thing - from Henry's handball, to Eduardo's dive, to the defender in your game who punched it back to his keeper - is that it is very hard to prove a deliberate act of 'cheating'. I know from experience that handling the ball is sometimes (not always, but sometimes) a quite instinctive and reflexive event; it's not planned, it just happens. Henry's handball was deliberate, and although it was a vaguely conscious decision to handball it, i don't think it can be called a conscious decision to cheat, in the true sense of the word. I'm sure that it's a similar story for diving footballers. A split second, barely conscious decision to gain an advantage. I think 'cheating' is too harsh a word for these actions - and so, evidently, does the FA, as it only deems it punishable by a yellow card. They are split second decisions made in high pressure environments.
To provide a contrast: planning, swallowing, and chewing on a blood capsule in order to gain an advantage is definitely cheating, as it was a construed act with considered intentions
I'm sure there is a small part of Henry that wished the ref had seen it straight after the event, because of how he knew the event would tarnish his reputation. This alone would prove that it was a split-second, almost sub-conscious action. Not really cheating - just an offense, like a cyncial foul.[/quote]
True enough, I guess Henry's handball was in a kind of greyish area because it would be hard to prove it was absolutely deliberate, certainly not as deliberate as that fat bastard who robbed me at Hall Place in 1993!
And handball is a difficult decision, but we expect a referee to make it in every single match on every single occasion
He only admitted it due to the fact that it was caught on tv cameras and because of the Irish players reaction/Irish fans reaction!
Hand of god my ars$!
O and Guardianistas being anti English --- i said that.
Of course, as supporters ourselves we sympathise with the Irish fans....but would people have been getting on their high horses quite so much if it had been Robbie Keane handballing with the same outcome thus putting out the French? And don't say an Irishman wouldn't do it because it has nothing to do with nationality and everything to do with the "professional" mindset of today's sportsmen. They're (nearly) all as bad as each other, so I have very little sympathy for players, who would happily cheat their own grandmothers if they thought it meant they'd "win" the game.
And GH - I know you said it. I said since when has it been true
But, what is the problem with cameras? Cricket and rugby have embraced technology and, if anything, the product is more exciting as a result.
But did you see what they did after they got off the train?
However, I would love to hear what Platini & Seb Fatter have to say about it though, the silence unsurprisingly is deafening.
I think the angle of people's fury is misdirected at Henry. Why aren't the referee and linesmen being questioned for such an obvious mistake?
What's wrong with the following: the referee should be allowed to ask the player whether he committed the offense or not. If Henry admitted it during the game, he gets the yellow, Ireland get the free kick and we play on. If Henry didn't admit to it, and it's later proven he did intentionally handball it, he gets a lengthy ban.
Salad you are correct--ish. I am the guardian of all things that are good taste on CL. The guardian of all things English and the guardian of my garden. As for the Guardianistas they know that when the revelution comes its Cuba or on a fire on Blackheath for them all. POWER TO (some) OF THE PEOPLE.
Absolutely GH.
And the bottom line is, FIFA can do whatever they damn well please, they can ban him for life if they want to - it's their competition - as we know they even changed the rules for the qualifyers half way through because it suited them.
Henry will probably get away with it, because its France involved.
If a team has a stonewall penalty claim turned down, do they get a replay?
The answer to the above is NO.
We have all benefitted/been shafted by a handball,unseen foul, dive.
Thats life.
If Henri went up to him straight after and confessed handball, the referee is not permitted to take the word of a player. Once the game is restarted, then the goal will always stand.
As pointed out, handball is only a yellow card offence - but the referee missed 2 separate handball incidents in quick succession. If each had been seen, the referee would have been within rights to issue 2 separate yellow cards in quick succession = red. But purely academic in any case, because neither handball incident was seen/acted on by the referee.
And I've never heard of a yellow issued retrospectively after the game is over, unlike red.
Perhaps the Irish players should have walked off the pitch in protest at the time. The match would have been abandoned, the Ireland FA no doubt censured - and no doubt the score would have been made the result.
But the point would have been made - and FIFA forced to confront the situation.
Indeed, MK Dons were denied a stonewall penalty on saturday when Christian Dailly handballed in the area, any demands to re-play the game and retrospectively punish Dailly? I thought not...
Then again the referee/his assistant has made at least three bad decisions this season that worked against Charlton - allowing an offside to stand that denied Burton a perfectly acceptable goal vs Southampton, allowing a blatant body check on Rob Elliot for Norwich's last minute equaliser and the non-existent penalty at Carlisle.
It's bad luck on Ireland, I don't think that the referee/his assistant saw the handball, and you can't give a foul you don't see. But as above in sport things have a habit of going full circle, and Tony Cascarino knowingly playing for Ireland when he knew he wasn't qualified is just as bad in my opinion. Should the matches he played in be discounted?