Hemed stamp [Charged, appealed, banned for 3 games]

[sussex_guy2k2]

Players score goals and run to the cameras to celebrate and the fans demand for the club to spend the TV millions on new talent.

Yet the same players then forget about the cameras when they do something wrong and the same fans complain that the TV media have highlighted it.

I'm not complaining about the media highlighting it - if there's a genuine incident then they should. But I don't personally think there's any intentional stamp there whatsoever, nor is there dangerous play. The Newcastle player is on the floor and Hemed is trying to get out of the way. It seemed to be a clear accident to anyone at the ground.

Consequently in a game where there was basically no incident of note, Sky had to make one to add to the drama.

 

[lawros left foot]

jobs worths ........they could do their credibility a lot of good by announcing that although they " thought that Hemed initially had a case to answer , after further investigation , speaking to the player and looking at slow mo replays numerous times however......they have reached the conclusion that the contact was accidental and without violent or malicious intent.

this will lead the average fan to surmise that they have done their job and are indeed rather smart and worthy of their positions.

Ah, but the FA don't give a toss what the average fan thinks, they are much more concerned about what Sky, the Sun , the Mirror , talksport , etc thinks.

 

[BensGrandad]

Just as an insight into the blazers at the FA. I sat on many disciplinary hearings and appeals when on Surrey FA and was always prepared to listen to the player or clubs appeal but in most cases if I questioned the ref or his actions I was met with the standard quote the ref must be right or he wouldnt have taken the action he did. They were not prepared to accept mistakes can happen and be made by refs it was always the player or clubs fault. 1 person even once suggested that if we dont back the ref completely and are not seen to do so we will lose referees.

 

[edna krabappel]

Agreed. I find it very odd that the FA are jumping on this incident when so many others go by unpunished. I do sometimes feel that the smaller clubs in the league get punished when bigger ones don't. If Hemed played for Manchester United or Chelsea, I doubt he'd have been charged.

Ibrahimovic got charged for his elbow on Tyrone Mings (who in turn got found guilty of stamping on Ibrahimovic's head and banned for five games). The Swede got three games for the elbow.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Just as an insight into the blazers at the FA. I sat on many disciplinary hearings and appeals when on Surrey FA and was always prepared to listen to the player or clubs appeal but in most cases if I questioned the ref or his actions I was met with the standard quote the ref must be right or he wouldnt have taken the action he did. They were not prepared to accept mistakes can happen and be made by refs it was always the player or clubs fault. 1 person even once suggested that if we dont back the ref completely and are not seen to do so we will lose referees.

In Hemed's case the referee did nothing, so hopefully the appeal will be successful, as the referee must have been right to do nothing.

 

[BensGrandad]

In Hemed's case the referee did nothing, so hopefully the appeal will be successful, as the referee must have been right to do nothing.

But 3 faceless ex refs have said otherwise although 2 prominent top rated ex Refs have said no action should be taken.

 

[Marshy]

what percentage of thesse cases actually get over turned....

 

[Icy Gull]

I hope the club have thought this through properly. How many games can it be extended if the appeal is thrown out? It's not like we've got strikers lining up to take over.

Personally think we should have accepted it through gritted teeth to avoid any further penalty.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Ibrahimovic got charged for his elbow on Tyrone Mings (who in turn got found guilty of stamping on Ibrahimovic's head and banned for five games). The Swede got three games for the elbow.

Ibrahimovic should have gone to JAIL for that. I'm not even joking.

 

[LamieRobertson]

I hope the club have thought this through properly. How many games can it be extended if the appeal is thrown out? It's not like we've got strikers lining up to take over.

Personally think we should have accepted it through gritted teeth to avoid any further penalty.

One according to other posts...and I doubt very much that it’s not been thought through

 

[BensGrandad]

I hope the club have thought this through properly. How many games can it be extended if the appeal is thrown out? It's not like we've got strikers lining up to take over.

We havent at the moment but could have by the time a 3 match ban is finished on 22nd October. Even if GM doesnt make it this week he then has 14 days more to be ready. So the most important is game is Sunday but I dont think we are expecting to get too much at The Emirates.

 

[Icy Gull]

One according to other posts...and I doubt very much that it’s not been thought through

Of course it has but even an extra game would be painful. I'm not sure that I have to agree wholeheartedly and doff my cap to everything the club does. They do get most things right but they are not infallible.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I hope the club have thought this through properly. How many games can it be extended if the appeal is thrown out? It's not like we've got strikers lining up to take over.

Personally think we should have accepted it through gritted teeth to avoid any further penalty.

We appealed three red cards (Stephens, Murphy and Murray) previously with no extra game bans. It's only if an appeal is deemed frivolous, that it is extended.

 

[dazzer6666]

This article just about sums up how it has worked......

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/...w-retrospective-refereeing-work-what-11173785

 

[Thunder Bolt]

This article just about sums up how it has worked......

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/...w-retrospective-refereeing-work-what-11173785

The last two paragraphs of that article is how I feel.

Similarly at Brighton the following day, all the focus after the whistle was on slow-motion replays of a wrongly disallowed Burnley goal while Joey Barton appears to have escaped after a stamp of his own.

There is a sense that broadcasters are getting to pick-and-choose which incidents get the full “controversy” treatment and that often the coverage is arbitrary.

Trial by media.

 

[dazzer6666]

The last two paragraphs of that article is how I feel.

Similarly at Brighton the following day, all the focus after the whistle was on slow-motion replays of a wrongly disallowed Burnley goal while Joey Barton appears to have escaped after a stamp of his own.

There is a sense that broadcasters are getting to pick-and-choose which incidents get the full “controversy” treatment and that often the coverage is arbitrary.

Trial by media.

Exactly......

 

[BensGrandad]

I know that it is inevitable but how can it be fair when a player has retrospective action taken against him because it was shown on TV when a player doing exactly the same in a a non televised game escapes unscathed. If the ref misses an incident on TV it is he who should be brought to task, not the player.

 

[Icy Gull]

I know that it is inevitable but how can it be fair when a player has retrospective action taken against him because it was shown on TV when a player doing exactly the same in a a non televised game escapes unscathed. If the ref misses an incident on TV it is he who should be brought to task, not the player.

Most football fans have been very pleased with the introduction of retrospective bans for players who have got away with something the ref missed in televised games. We have to just suck it up now we are one of the clubs under the microscope.

 

[BensGrandad]

Most football fans have been very pleased with the introduction of retrospective bans for players who have got away with something the ref missed in televised games. We have to just suck it up now we are one of the clubs under the microscope.

Surely the guilty one is the ref for missing it, as he is paid to see such things.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The last two paragraphs of that article is how I feel.

Similarly at Brighton the following day, all the focus after the whistle was on slow-motion replays of a wrongly disallowed Burnley goal while Joey Barton appears to have escaped after a stamp of his own.

There is a sense that broadcasters are getting to pick-and-choose which incidents get the full “controversy” treatment and that often the coverage is arbitrary.

Trial by media.

Most football fans have been very pleased with the introduction of retrospective bans for players who have got away with something the ref missed in televised games. We have to just suck it up now we are one of the clubs under the microscope.

It depends on the tv coverage though, doesn't it?