Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Zaha Banned + Fined



















Biscuit

Biscuit

Native Creative
Jul 8, 2003
22,220
Brighton
Now I'm no Zaha fan but swearing at a fan results in a fine and a ban. Yet the FA decide Callum McManaman's horror (and potentially career ending) tackle should go unpunished.

Not really right is it.
 


A

Aseros

Banned
Jun 6, 2011
1,382
Biscuit said:
Now I'm no Zaha fan but swearing at a fan results in a fine and a ban. Yet the FA decide Callum McManaman's horror (and potentially career ending) tackle should go unpunished.

Not really right is it.
Click to expand...

Punishing the tackle would open up a can of worms though. Things should not be retroactively punished if spotted by the officials already and no action taken.
 












Biscuit

Biscuit

Native Creative
Jul 8, 2003
22,220
Brighton
Aseros said:
Punishing the tackle would open up a can of worms though. Things should not be retroactively punished if spotted by the officials already and no action taken.
Click to expand...

Not punishing it is worse in my book. Perhaps Newcastle should get legal advice. If that had been a Brighton player out for the season while McManaman walks away scot free I'd be LIVID.
 


M

Mellor 3 Ward 4

Well-known member
Jul 27, 2004
9,805
saaf of the water
Biscuit said:
Now I'm no Zaha fan but swearing at a fan results in a fine and a ban. Yet the FA decide Callum McManaman's horror (and potentially career ending) tackle should go unpunished.

Not really right is it.
Click to expand...

Agree re the 'tackle'

C McM should be getting minimum of a three game ban.

Zaha's punishment is about right IMO
 


Dougie

Dougie

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2012
5,702
And the Wigan boy got away scot free .
 




Tricky Dicky

Tricky Dicky

New member
Jul 27, 2004
13,558
Sunny Shoreham
Aseros said:
Punishing the tackle would open up a can of worms though. Things should not be retroactively punished if spotted by the officials already and no action taken.
Click to expand...

I really don't see why not. If the ref doesn't take what most people would consider reasonable action, it should be reviewed.
 


Everest

Everest

Me
Jul 5, 2003
20,741
Southwick
Philzo-93 said:
I know he purposely did the hearing so he can avoid the ban for the game on Sunday. Might as well have not played :lolol:
Click to expand...

He didn't, did he? :D
 


Triggaaar

Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,201
Goldstone
Biscuit said:
Now I'm no Zaha fan but swearing at a fan results in a fine and a ban. Yet the FA decide Callum McManaman's horror (and potentially career ending) tackle should go unpunished.

Not really right is it.
Click to expand...
It is not right that Callum's tackle went unpunished, no. Not sure what that's got to do with Zaha though.
 






Biscuit

Biscuit

Native Creative
Jul 8, 2003
22,220
Brighton
Triggaaar said:
It is not right that Callum's tackle went unpunished, no. Not sure what that's got to do with Zaha though.
Click to expand...

Directly it's not about Zaha but the fairness of the rulebook. Zaha deserved his fine and ban, but by the same measure C MCM deserves the same treatment.

Horror Tackle: Unpunished.
Swearing at crowed: Punished.
 


TheMajor

TheMajor

BHA>CPFC
Sep 27, 2011
3,431
laughing at the size of the JackHunts crowds.
Biscuit said:
Now I'm no Zaha fan but swearing at a fan results in a fine and a ban. Yet the FA decide Callum McManaman's horror (and potentially career ending) tackle should go unpunished.

Not really right is it.
Click to expand...

I agree Biscuit. It's not really right. Zaha should have got three matches as it was a straight red offence.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here