it was a quick tape so cant judge as their pen.. did u see the colchester pen???? that disgraceful decision... we would be 4 points in front of them now
Ref was poor as is half (sorry) all the refs at this level. What i am finding strange is that we pick up yellow cards for minor offences and for the opposition it doen't matter how many fouls you commit or type of fouls you don't get a yellow card unless you shoot someone (not that I am condoning shooting). As for Dailly's red card. I see it as this way. Dailly was frustrated as threy were continually diving for free kicks (as per Yeovil's 2nd goal) whereby their opponent clearly climbed all over Dailly fouled Dailly and then from the free kick Yeovil scored (hey referees and lino don't worry youcocked up that decision when it should be free kick our way). Dailly then moaned to the lino 5 mins later (cue sensitive lino and crap refereee 10 mins later) Dailyy raised his elbow BUT DID NOT ELBOW their player in the face !!!) but bundled him onto the ground with his elbow into the back off the player and he made a meal of it and got him sent off. However I think the rule is "If u raise ur arms...." However the referees seem to follow their own rules... when our players get yellow get cards for minor offences other players are commiting worse fouls but gettin NO cards. That is so frustrating !!! Parky gets callled up before the fa but refs are allowed to make cock ups and get away with it... FA and referees have got Huge problems but they won't admit it. If a manager complains they won't have it. The FA need to get their head out of their cushy little arses and sort out the standard of refereeing as they are a joke and and embarassment!!
Worst decision was the Yeovil that went down in the penalty area as if a high kick had got him, looked around, got up and ran off. Shocking bit of cheating. For what it's worth, the only post-game disciplinary stuff I would want to see introduce would be clampdowns on cheating like that. Obviously, I expect Platini and Blatter to read this and act immediately.
I missed it but my uncle was adamant it was a punch/elbow.
We sit in the east so may have looked like nothing in the covered end, certainly all the protests came from that stand. Lost a bit of respect for the man if so, as well as winnning the toss and kicking the wrong way.
Will depend of ref -was clash of heads but arm up didn't help. Yeovil manager said heads and player said heads so if ref not a typical ref common sense will prevail. You can't give a player a 4 game ban fror something he didn't do. Assistant gave it and i can understand from the angle. Ackpo was going to head it in or over (lol) so definitely a penalty and a sending off so if ref supports Dailly appeal I will say he had a decent match.
That's the point - they clashed heads so booking possibly but not straight red. He was sent off because officials thought he caught their palyer with his elbow which didn't happen.
[cite]Posted By: MuttleyCAFC[/cite]That's the point - they clashed heads so booking possibly but not straight red. He was sent off because officials thought he caught their palyer with his elbow which didn't happen.
I am not saying you are wrong but it does not look that way on the TV and that is what they are going to review so if there are better angles than on the TV the referee is never going to admit he got it wrong, so I think we will have to make do with Fortune, Llerra and Doherty
While it looks ugly on TV, and you can therefore excuse the officials for getting it wrong, there has to be something seriously wrong with the system if both the manager and player from Yeovil confirm it was a clash of heads.
Unfortunately as we have discovered before, there is quite a lot wrong with the system. It would be greatly improved if the appeals system was required to post rationales for their decisions. Why shouldn't we be able to scrutinise them? its our money which pays for them.
Haven’t yet seen it on TV, but I’d be very influenced by the player’s reaction. Dailly clearly thought he’d been hard done by. Contrast that with Colochini. Feigned innocence when Elmander went down, but didn’t protest when shown the red. He knew what he’d done.
However, I’d be very surprised if the card is rescinded. The problem is that the authorities simply don’t like appeals. In part this is because they are confused. They seem to genuinely believe that mistakes are all part of the game [i.e. somehow part of the excitement] and that “changing” decisions after the game undermines the referee. At some point in the future technology will be used during matches [it’s just inevitable] and once this happens it won’t be long before everybody will be asking why on earth it didn’t happen sooner. The same will be seen as being even more true of post game reviews. But for now we are stuck in the wrong paradigm. The main reason though is practical. If they actually took a sensible approach to post game reviews of the action [reviewing cards and looking for cheating for example] they know they’d be overrun with dozens of appeals each week and they just aren’t ready for that yet.
What this means is that a mistake has to be absolutely blatant for an appeal to succeed. If Dailly did anything at all [e.g. raise his arm whether he made contact with it or not] to justify a decision to uphold the original decision the appeal will fail. My guess is that Breaker gets this and hence is comment that they need a camera angle that is very conclusive. As someone said, we’ll almost certainly need to hope that Fortune can cover.
if as reported, the Yeovil player and his manager has confirmed it was a clash of heads, something is very wrong with the system if an appeal is rejected.
The professional game is evidentally too quick for many 40 something year old referees - and the sooner the 4th official is permitted to check key decisions from a TV monitor beside him once the play is stopped, it will be a victory for common sense.
As I understand it, it costs money to appeal. Maybe the final decision will be taken at board level.
Personally think Huntington got Dailly sent off. He came running across waving his arms at the ref and indicating it was an elbow.
Bit of Karma at work when he later saw red?.
Have watched it a couple of times and it looks like a clash of heads. Dailly's arm is up, but he certainly doesn't lead with an elbow. Personally think we won't appeal and Dailly will have to serve the suspension.
Watched it a few times on i-player, even pausing it at the moment of impact, it looks to me like a clash of heads, I agree his arm is up but it doesnt appear to touch the yeovil player. If the yeovil player and manager say it was a clash of heads as does Daily, perhaps the ref will update his report and admit he may have made a mistake in sending him off.....if not I fear the worst and a 4 match ban is on the cards.
When I saw it replayed I can see why the officials might see it as they did- his arm WAS up after all. I hope an appeal would work but doubt it somehow...
[cite]Posted By: Kap10[/cite]Anyone know exactly what the rules say? if it is raising arms then he's a goner
he will have been sent of for "violent conduct" as there's no mention of arms in the Laws. As usual, it's down to interpretation, still looked a little dangerous to me, so personally can't see the red being rescinded.
Comments
I presume the ref sent him for use of the elbow then ?
We sit in the east so may have looked like nothing in the covered end, certainly all the protests came from that stand. Lost a bit of respect for the man if so, as well as winnning the toss and kicking the wrong way.
I am not saying you are wrong but it does not look that way on the TV and that is what they are going to review so if there are better angles than on the TV the referee is never going to admit he got it wrong, so I think we will have to make do with Fortune, Llerra and Doherty
Unfortunately as we have discovered before, there is quite a lot wrong with the system. It would be greatly improved if the appeals system was required to post rationales for their decisions. Why shouldn't we be able to scrutinise them? its our money which pays for them.
However, I’d be very surprised if the card is rescinded. The problem is that the authorities simply don’t like appeals. In part this is because they are confused. They seem to genuinely believe that mistakes are all part of the game [i.e. somehow part of the excitement] and that “changing” decisions after the game undermines the referee. At some point in the future technology will be used during matches [it’s just inevitable] and once this happens it won’t be long before everybody will be asking why on earth it didn’t happen sooner. The same will be seen as being even more true of post game reviews. But for now we are stuck in the wrong paradigm. The main reason though is practical. If they actually took a sensible approach to post game reviews of the action [reviewing cards and looking for cheating for example] they know they’d be overrun with dozens of appeals each week and they just aren’t ready for that yet.
What this means is that a mistake has to be absolutely blatant for an appeal to succeed. If Dailly did anything at all [e.g. raise his arm whether he made contact with it or not] to justify a decision to uphold the original decision the appeal will fail. My guess is that Breaker gets this and hence is comment that they need a camera angle that is very conclusive. As someone said, we’ll almost certainly need to hope that Fortune can cover.
The professional game is evidentally too quick for many 40 something year old referees - and the sooner the 4th official is permitted to check key decisions from a TV monitor beside him once the play is stopped, it will be a victory for common sense.
Personally think Huntington got Dailly sent off. He came running across waving his arms at the ref and indicating it was an elbow.
Bit of Karma at work when he later saw red?.
Have watched it a couple of times and it looks like a clash of heads. Dailly's arm is up, but he certainly doesn't lead with an elbow. Personally think we won't appeal and Dailly will have to serve the suspension.
he will have been sent of for "violent conduct" as there's no mention of arms in the Laws. As usual, it's down to interpretation, still looked a little dangerous to me, so personally can't see the red being rescinded.
Fearing the same again......
Frivolous.
FA will give us exactly that sweet F.A.
Oh well.. Fortune or LLera is the question...