[Albion] Dunk - straight red?

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

3 game ban now apparently. Twats.

Can’t see this being reported anywhere at the moment?

FA website is still showing a two game ban at this time as well.

The only way it could be extended is if the FA have charged him with something, possibly related to him getting in the 4th officials face when leaving the pitch, but that wouldn’t have been sorted this quickly. Or the club have made what is deemed to be a frivolous appeal, but I don’t think we’d have done that.

At the moment I can see no reason for them extending his ban.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

3 game ban now apparently. Twats.

Sauce?

 

[SeagullinExile]

Can’t see this being reported anywhere at the moment?

FA website is still showing a two game ban at this time as well.

One of my punters said he just saw SSN say an extra game ban to be given.....however this COULD be extra to a one game ban thinking about it.

 

[goldstone]

Dunk was an idiot. He is old enough and experienced enough to know better. Not exactly a good example to set as captain is it?

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Dunk was an idiot. He is old enough and experienced enough to know better. Not exactly a good example to set as captain is it?

No it's not a good example to set.

He didn't actually behave particularly differently than most other players would in similar circumstances.
The early reporting of it made it sound like he was raging at the ref and swearing in his face.
It was nothing of the kind.
He let slip a single curse, out of frustration, at a pretty poor decision. and a very harsh yellow card.
He was punished to a level that hasn't been meted out for 15 years.

He shouldn't have done it.
He knows that.
He has let the team down.
I expect a monster performance from him, on Thursday to make up.

 

[Slum_Wolf]

Can’t see this being reported anywhere at the moment?

FA website is still showing a two game ban at this time as well.

The only way it could be extended is if the FA have charged him with something, possibly related to him getting in the 4th officials face when leaving the pitch, but that wouldn’t have been sorted this quickly. Or the club have made what is deemed to be a frivolous appeal, but I don’t think we’d have done that.

At the moment I can see no reason for them extending his ban.

Maupay's was three games with no appeal by BHAFC as it could have been deemed frivolous with an extra game ban thrown in for good measure. Perhaps we will find out what Dunk actually said if the Maupay case is anything to go by...

https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2021/the-fa-v-neal-maupay---17-may-2021.ashx

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Maupay's was three games with no appeal by BHAFC as it could have been deemed frivolous with an extra game ban thrown in for good measure. Perhaps we will find out what Dunk actually said if the Maupay case is anything to go by...

https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2021/the-fa-v-neal-maupay---17-may-2021.ashx

I am looking forward to this.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Maupay's was three games with no appeal by BHAFC as it could have been deemed frivolous with an extra game ban thrown in for good measure. Perhaps we will find out what Dunk actually said if the Maupay case is anything to go by...

https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2021/the-fa-v-neal-maupay---17-may-2021.ashx

Maupay had a two game ban extended to three after he faced a misconduct charge. He missed the West Ham (h), Man City (h) and Arsenal (a) games at the end of the 20-21 season. He then played and scored against Burnley in the opening game of the 21-22 season.

As I said above Dunk would need to be charged for them to extend the ban and as yet nothing has been announced.

 

[Slum_Wolf]

Maupay had a two game ban extended to three after he faced a misconduct charge. He missed the West Ham (h), Man City (h) and Arsenal (a) games at the end of the 20-21 season. He then played and scored against Burnley in the opening game of the 21-22 season.

As I said above Dunk would need to be charged for them to extend the ban and as yet nothing has been announced.

Indeed. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if Dunk is charged...

 

[American Seagle]

Nothing to see here. And people say the EPL refs are not biased in any way

 

[LamieRobertson]

Nothing to see here. And people say the EPL refs are not biased in any way
View attachment 170735

…move that on about ten seconds and Goldilocks definitely used the f word at the bald one

 

[pocketseagull]

Isn't the issue that Dunk got personal by calling him a 'bald prick'? He knew that he'd crossed the line. Refs will accept players being angry and screaming just don't get personal with the abuse.

 

[Bodian]

Isn't the issue that Dunk got personal by calling him a 'bald prick'? He knew that he'd crossed the line. Refs will accept players being angry and screaming just don't get personal with the abuse.

Do we actually know what he called him yet? Does the refs report ever get published?

 

[KZNSeagull]

Isn't the issue that Dunk got personal by calling him a 'bald prick'? He knew that he'd crossed the line. Refs will accept players being angry and screaming just don't get personal with the abuse.

Yup. I remember when Elleray was miked up for an Arsenal game years and years ago. Arsenal gave him dogs abuse the whole game but he did not book anyone until Adams called him a cheat.

 

[dazzer6666]

Think the difference is saying ‘f… off’ is deemed less ‘abusive’ than personalising it directly by saying ‘you’re a ****ing ****’ or whatever it was Dunk was supposed to have said.

 

[Weststander]

Isn't the issue that Dunk got personal by calling him a 'bald prick'? He knew that he'd crossed the line. Refs will accept players being angry and screaming just don't get personal with the abuse.

Exactly.

But Haaland should’ve been booked.

By coincidence a very informative ref on Sutton & Savage this evening explained the difference of a red or yellow for dissent.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Think the difference is saying ‘f… off’ is deemed less ‘abusive’ than personalising it directly by saying ‘you’re a ****ing ****’ or whatever it was Dunk was supposed to have said.

So saying f off to the ref isn’t personal?
Especially given the aggressive manner in which it was said which was worse

 

[LamieRobertson]

Exactly.

But Haaland should’ve been booked.

By coincidence a very informative ref on Sutton & Savage this explained the difference of a red or yellow for dissent.

Agreed

 

[dazzer6666]

So saying f off to the ref isn’t personal?

It’s not a personal insult- subtle difference but that’s what they’re using.

 

[LamieRobertson]

It’s not a personal insult- subtle difference but that’s what they’re using.

See the rest of my post by me …the manner in which it was said …I’d say intimidating