Intent is the not the deciding factor, otherwise reds would be rare. No need to copy and paste the modern rules yet again in this thread, but it’s all there in black and white.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Mounie red card..(Hudds lodge - and lose - appeal)
- Thread starter Sheebo
- Start date
Intent is the not the deciding factor, otherwise reds would be rare. No need to copy and paste the modern rules yet again in this thread, but it’s all there in black and white.
For you maybe. But not for referees, as intent plays no part in the laws.
Boroseagull
Well-known member
If all the Daily Mail haters can bring themselves to read the match report in today's paper they will see a brilliant close up of the incident together with Chris Foy's opinion.
Ah, so you correcting a minor technical mistake in someone's post is fine, but other people doing it to you is pompous. Got it.
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
....and still it goes on
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
?
... the King Canute’s bizarrely interpreting the incident under old school football.
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
As an aside from the posters on here ...I have just listened (for my sins) to Talksport ..and Raymondo Parlour and the lady presenter both though it was clearly a poor decision ..she had seen it from one angle which apparently wasn't the refs..oh and hadn't seen the 'penalty one' ..but referred to it as Pascal bring down Pritchard ...erm no...watch it lass and then talk about it!
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
I didn't say that the ref was determining it based on intent. I'm saying that if there was no intent it was a mistimed tackle by Mounie, which should in my opinion be a yellow card. If there was intent, then Mounie was kicking out at Bissouma, which is violent conduct / serious foul play, and always a red card.
Glawstergull
Well-known member
THIS.
I do understand your view. But the game has moved on, and it’s a straight red challenge.
My personal opinion, for what’s it’s worth, is that Mounie was a snide and wanted it to leave a little on Bissouma. Goes on every match with studs mysteriously always exactly landing on the instep or achilles.
Agree...his reaction indicated as much as well. No real protest.
Murray 17
Well-known member
- Jul 6, 2003
- 2,159
I think what we want to be a red, and what the new laws state is a red, are two different things to some of us.
Huddersfield may well appeal, but won't win because it was interpreted to be a red by the referee, who was in a good position. Appeals are rarely successful, and when they are it is for glaring mistakes or when the ref has sent off the wrong person.
It's a shame that Stephens and Mounie where sent off for the sake of a good game, but until the rules are changed we will see many more sides going down to 10 men.
Huddersfield may well appeal, but won't win because it was interpreted to be a red by the referee, who was in a good position. Appeals are rarely successful, and when they are it is for glaring mistakes or when the ref has sent off the wrong person.
It's a shame that Stephens and Mounie where sent off for the sake of a good game, but until the rules are changed we will see many more sides going down to 10 men.
Graham Poll emphatically cleared up the subject on intent last year:
“Fifteen years ago it wouldn't have been a red card offence because it used to be that it had to be intentional. But now that's taken away.
“You've made the intent by leaving your foot that high and so you have to live with the consequences.
“Apart from handball, any other offence in terms of intent has been taken out.
“It's actually the offence you do, rather than what you mean to do”.
“Fifteen years ago it wouldn't have been a red card offence because it used to be that it had to be intentional. But now that's taken away.
“You've made the intent by leaving your foot that high and so you have to live with the consequences.
“Apart from handball, any other offence in terms of intent has been taken out.
“It's actually the offence you do, rather than what you mean to do”.
Mounie was sent off because it was a straight red offence under 21st century rules and interpretation. Excellent refereeing. Zero grounds for a frivalous appeal.
Chris Foy’s view kind of closes it doesn’t it ?
.... probably not enough for those weirdly unable to accept that the rules changed.