We already know they're clueless, don't you remember Murphy's red card? We all know we've been wronged, and even a 1 game ban is adding insult to injury, but fans have no faith in the FA/FL, so some would still take a 1 game ban as it's better than a 3.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Dale Stephens' appeal [Update: appeal rejected, 3 game ban stands]
- Thread starter bhanutz
- Start date
I've seen this mentioned before and I don't think it's true.
Courts are really loath to get involved in sporting disputes unless there's a cast-iron case for doing so. For this to be the case, there'd have to be a clear demonstration that a dismissal automatically (or nearly automatically) means a side loses and we all know that isn't the case (hell, in the past, we've lost a game when the opposition had TWO men dismissed).
I can't see any legal action from Brighton if we got this rescinded, it's not on the agenda
KingstonSeagull
New member
That's nonsense, you could apply that logic to all games. Of course that one game was a decider for promotion, but let's not pretend there aren't countless other games that decide who goes up, down, into the CL, etc etc every year.
Since you're talking about a legal challenge, you could do that without the FA cancelling the ban. Your lawyers don't need them to admit their mistake in order to start a claim. But no one makes claims like this, because it's understood that you get mistakes in football, and you move on. Like when England scored against Germany, and it wasn't given - everyone knew it was wrong, but there wasn't even a request for a replay let alone a legal challenge, because that's football.
There are mistakes in every game. This hearing is to prevent further punishment resulting from a referee's mistake.
my response is uncorrupt and correct. if the fa don't do the right thing then they are only proving they are corrupt. if the quash the ban as a mistake a gentlemans agreement to not pursue any further legal action could be set. if they don't do the the right thing what is to stop us taking it to uefa or whoever until someone admits it was wrong to brandish a red card. everyone is accountable for the actions. as I was when a linesman I threatened to shove my flag up a refs jacksy.
This legal action stuff is nonsense - the decision was wrong, but that is just the way things go. One decision doesn't decide who gets promotion. There is no reason at all not to just overturn the decision - which was made without the help of replays - and we move on to Friday - but just do it now as I can't take the wait.
The Andy Naylor Fan Club
Well-known member
How long does it take The FA to get the Match Officials' report? Nothing showing on the website.
JonnyComeEarly
UTA!!
Why? Becuase what 'should' happen (it gets over ruled) probably wont. So a 1 game ban is much better than 3
But we live in a free country and we expect justice. The FA/FL isn't free, it's a dictatorship. If you lived in a dictatorship and you were arrested after being accused of moving your eyes, you'd probably be relieved if they later told you you'd serve one day in jail.
For some strange reason it only shows up if you do not add 'Brighton and Hove Albion'
Smiley Miley
New member
brightonrock
Dodgy Hamstrings
- Jan 1, 2008
- 2,482
I see the Derby lad Thorne had his leg broken in a tackle for which his opponent wasn't even booked. Now I've not seen that tackle but if refs are saying it's a red for the severity of injury caused then I assume they'll retrospectively ban the Ipswich player?
And next time two players clash heads and one ends up bleeding, that'll be a red too? "Look at his head, look at his head!", to paraphrase Mike Dean.
One rule for one...
It's infuriating that the FA/FL won't apply common sense, listen to reason or admit fault. They won't be consistent across the board. They won't let The Mike Dean Show succumb to poor reviews. They'll just close ranks and prove AGAIN that the game is rotten from top to bottom. I'm not saying we would have won against Boro with 11 on the pitch. Maybe in an alternative universe he shows a yellow and we get beaten anyway. But that shambles of a red, influenced by their player, the occasion and the atmosphere, robbed us of the level playing field to try.
It's weeks like this that make me question why I shell out hundreds of quid a year to be patronised and aggravated by a closed shop of boundless, unrepentantly corrupt ********s.
And next time two players clash heads and one ends up bleeding, that'll be a red too? "Look at his head, look at his head!", to paraphrase Mike Dean.
One rule for one...
It's infuriating that the FA/FL won't apply common sense, listen to reason or admit fault. They won't be consistent across the board. They won't let The Mike Dean Show succumb to poor reviews. They'll just close ranks and prove AGAIN that the game is rotten from top to bottom. I'm not saying we would have won against Boro with 11 on the pitch. Maybe in an alternative universe he shows a yellow and we get beaten anyway. But that shambles of a red, influenced by their player, the occasion and the atmosphere, robbed us of the level playing field to try.
It's weeks like this that make me question why I shell out hundreds of quid a year to be patronised and aggravated by a closed shop of boundless, unrepentantly corrupt ********s.
Exactly, is this really that difficult to grasp? It's just one of those moments where you just stand there open mouthed, looking around you to see if everyone else can see that the world's gone ****ing mad.
aolstudios
Well-known member
Arthritic Toe
Well-known member
I think the queen is allowed to issue a pardon.
Bwian
Kiss my (_!_)
- Jul 14, 2003
- 15,898
I see the logic but hate how we could be without what was one of better players at Boro. Even 1 game puts us at a disadvantage-that would be 2 key players missing from a very important away leg.
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
Wasn't Rosenior's injury at the Amex very similar which put him out for a few months which is a bit more than a Mr Bump plaster could treat. That wasn't even a free kick.