Search results

Most of the discussion on this thread is about the (lack of) consistency. Using foul or abusive language directly to a ref is a red card offence. Fine, no problem. If what Dunk said is foul and abusive language then the red card is justified. Apply the rule consistently. I absolutely refuse to...

It looks like the rule has been arbitrarily tightened by Taylor on a one-off basis, because it wasn't tightened in the Everton or Villa matches this weekend.. If PGMOL or IFAB is going to change the accepted standard for punishing foul and abusive language (after 15 years of precedence where...

and if her first response was" I have done this many times before when walking to school with and you have never told me off, so why are you only doing it this one time? Are you a bald prick in disguise"?

Starlizard Integrity has contracts with La Liga and several other leagues but not the EPL. Maybe another algorithm-driven integrity business is working with the EPL but I suspect not because, well, it's the EPL.

Maupay's was after the final whistle.

"Bald prick" according to amateur lipreaders. There may have been a "bellend" involved somewhere in the discussion too.

Understood. Why has neither Taylor nor any other EPL ref applied the same punishment on any other occasion in the last 12 years? Was he uniquely offended by the word "bald"?

The evidence suggests the referees are incompetent and/or other factors are in play to explain their inconsistency. We see it in virtually every game. Nothing libellous there. Taylor dishing out the first red card for foul and abusive language in the prem for 12 years is an indication that...

Once in 15 years in the EPL? Doesn't appear to be very "that's it", does it? More like it's not Bruno Fernández or Virgil Van Dijk or Romero or Gallagher or Trippier or Ashley Young or any other player but it's Lewis Dunk and his manager doesn't like me, plus I've completely lost control so I'm...

15 years since the last on the field of play. 12 years since the last off the field of play.

Foul and abusive language. The first such red card on the pitch for this offence since Alan Smith in 2008. Yet we've seen players shout abuse at the refs many, many times in the intervening period without punishment.

I'm not angry as such. I am a little peeved that Taylor decided to take action concerning an "offence" that occurs in nearly every match but is never punished. This seems unfair

Call it what you want. The media is referring to it as dissent. If it is foul and abusive language so be it.

You're splitting hairs. Foul/abusive language.

No. Do you understand the problem when a referee makes a decision that has not been taken one single time in more than a decade? If not, I will try to explain; Taylor has arbitrarily reinterpreted the PGMOL standard interpretation of the dissent rule, in conflict with the numerous situations...

Do you think the others will take notice now? They didn't take any notice for 12 years after Cattermole was sent off.

Refs are not inconsistent when it comes to red cards for dissent. Dunk's was the first in the EPL in 12 years (Lee Cattermole in 2011). They are very, very consistent. They DO NOT give red cards for dissent. They HAVE NOT applied the rule for 12 years........until Taylor decided to give Dunk a...

12 years without a single red card for dissent in the EPL.

There is no inconsistency. No player has been sent off for dissent in the Premier League since Lee Cattermole in 2011, until Taylor sent Dunk off on Saturday. They have been totally consistent for 12 years. Taylor decided, for reasons unknown, to enforce a rule that has not been enforced once in...

The first red card for dissent in the EPL for 12 years. 12 YEARS. How many "big 6" players have verbally abused referees in the past 12 years without getting a red card? 50? 100? 200?