United ask to get red card overturned on compassionate grounds...

Originally Posted by dodger

Should we change results too then?

No. That's a stupid thing to say.

Originally Posted by the heathen

I cant actually remember the details but why didn't Everton sue UEFA for that at the time? Surely they had a case for compensation?

Everton got knocked out in the Qualifying rounds by Villareal

Originally Posted by dunk

No. That's a stupid thing to say.

I disagree. I think we £#%&! about with these things too much. If a ref makes a mistake and gives a pen or a goal we swallow it so why not a red card?

We also get situations where players cards aren't rescinded because another part of the rule says they can't when it's obvious they shouldn't have been carded. So how is that fair?

All this after the event stuff is %@#$&!s imo. If you get a bum deal then tough shit. That's life I'm afraid.

Originally Posted by dodger

I disagree. I think we £#%&! about with these things too much. If a ref makes a mistake and gives a pen or a goal we swallow it so why not a red card?

We also get situations where players cards aren't rescinded because another part of the rule says they can't when it's obvious they shouldn't have been carded. So how is that fair?

All this after the event stuff is %@#$&!s imo. If you get a bum deal then tough shit. That's life I'm afraid.

The ref dropped a %@#$&! during the game and it was swallowed, we conceded a penalty that never was and a goal. Barca a freekick and played the remainder of the game with 10 men.

To uphold the suspension as well would be to extend the mistake for a 2nd game, which isn't right when unjust punishment has been dished out once.

it was the wrong decision, but as a few have tbh we should move on and deal with it, all this 'compassionate grounds' is a bit scouse for my liking.

yeah it's a shite deal for fletch, but life sucks, deal with it








of course all the above would fly out of the window if it was rooney we were talking about

Originally Posted by dunk

The ref dropped a %@#$&! during the game and it was swallowed, we conceded a penalty that never was and a goal. Barca a freekick and played the remainder of the game with 10 men.

To uphold the suspension as well would be to extend the mistake for a 2nd game, which isn't right when unjust punishment has been dished out once.

So if we're all certain about it being wrong why not scrub the goal?

Originally Posted by dodger

So if we're all certain about it being wrong why not scrub the goal?

What happens during the game cannot be changed.

I bet that if Rooney had nutted Sagna and it had been missed by the ref, it would be re-looked at though, resulting in a suspension. If it works one way, why not the other?

Originally Posted by dunk

What happens during the game cannot be changed.

Well that's what I think too but if the idea is to make everything as fair as possible we should start adjusting scores.

Originally Posted by dunk

I bet that if Rooney had nutted Sagna and it had been missed by the ref, it would be re-looked at though, resulting in a suspension. If it works one way, why not the other?

Sure. And penalise dives, spitting etc. The issue of goal line technology would go away too as that could all be adjusted after the game.

Or we could just go back to how it was before when it was just tough shit. And, to be honest, the game didn't suffer as I remember it.

Originally Posted by dodger

Well that's what I think too but if the idea is to make everything as fair as possible we should start adjusting scores.



Sure. And penalise dives, spitting etc. The issue of goal line technology would go away too as that could all be adjusted after the game.

Or we could just go back to how it was before when it was just tough shit. And, to be honest, the game didn't suffer as I remember it.

WTF are you on about?

You think it is right that a blatant £#%&! up that already affected one game should affect another regardless?

So, for instance, Ben Thatcher nearly killing Pedro Mendes, Thatcher should've been let off because the ref did £#%&! all? Just one example.

Originally Posted by dunk

WTF are you about?

You think it is right that a blatant £#%&! up that already affected one game should affect another regardless?

So, for instance, Ben Thatcher nearly killing Pedro Mendes, Thatcher should've been let off because the ref did £#%&! all? Just one example.

By that logic why should it affect the game it happened in?

Originally Posted by dodger

By that logic why should it affect the game it happened in?

What?

Let me just clarify. You are advocating that whatever happens in a game, from a disciplinary point of view, should stand, regardless?

So, Leg break, career ending challenges that the referee doesn't punish are fine, if you get away with it you get away with it? Similarly, if you are punished for something you didn't do, tough shit?

You're a £#%&!ing idiot.

One thing that's being largely ignored here is the importance of having Fletcher play against Barca for the team's sake.

It's bad enough that he has to miss one of the biggest games in his career due to an unfair decision (and I feel for him) but Fletcher's personal feelings aside we have a huge match to win and we could really do with Fletch to disrupt Barca's passing game. The midfield trio that played both legs against Arsenal is extremely effective and will be sorely missed.

Originally Posted by dunk

What?

Let me just clarify. You are advocating that whatever happens in a game, from a disciplinary point of view, should stand, regardless?

So, Leg break, career ending challenges that the referee doesn't punish are fine, if you get away with it you get away with it? Similarly, if you are punished for something you didn't do, tough shit?

You're a £#%&!ing idiot.

He's seeing his arse. Go easy on him.

In other news, Graham Poll said the red card was correct :£#%&!er:

Originally Posted by dunk

You're a £#%&!ing idiot.

Really no need for that. If you can't have a discussion regarding your opinion about changing the rules of football to suit your needs without calling somebody a £#%&!ing idiot you should probably keep quiet.

Originally Posted by dunk

So, Leg break, career ending challenges that the referee doesn't punish are fine, if you get away with it you get away with it? Similarly, if you are punished for something you didn't do, tough shit?.

If you're so keen for fairness to be applied why are you so against changing scores after games have finished?

Originally Posted by TreeFiddy

He's seeing his arse. Go easy on him.

Me? What did I do?

Originally Posted by dodger

Really no need for that. If you can't have a discussion regarding your opinion about changing the rules of football to suit your needs without calling somebody a £#%&!ing idiot you should probably keep quiet.



If you're so keen for fairness to be applied why are you so against changing scores after games have finished?

Don't try and patronise, you're obviously not smart enough.

It's not changing the rules of the game, as it isn't a rule of the game, it is one of UEFA's policies. There is an appeal system of sorts in place in every league, so how is it changing the rules?

Suspension from further games is part of the punishment for the crime of being sent from the field of play, for breaking the laws of the game. If you didn't break any rules and were snet off in error, why should you be punished further?

If UEFA can punish a player retrospectively for something a referee missed, why can't they pardon a player for something a referee got wrong?

In your World people would be sent to jail for a crime they didn't commit, evidence would then clear them, but you make them serve the time anyway

It's got nothing to do with changing results or serving 'my' purpose, what happens during the 90 minutes happens, it's part of the game, suspensions for £#%&! all aren't.

One plus point about this is that Arsenal scored for me...

£10 on 3 - 1 at 25/1 - I was chuffed; Rome paid for

Originally Posted by Cheesesof Nazareth

One plus point about this is that Arsenal scored for me...

£10 on 3 - 1 at 25/1 - I was chuffed; Rome paid for

A guy at work went on Tuesday, his mate found £15 on the walk to the ground and lumped it on 3-1 United

Stuffy @#%&!s.

Originally Posted by dunk

?

In your World people would be sent to jail for a crime they didn't commit, evidence would then clear them, but you make them serve the time anyway.

No, we're talking about a game of football.

Originally Posted by dunk

?
If UEFA can punish a player retrospectively for something a referee missed, why can't they pardon a player for something a referee got wrong?
:.

That's a fair point certainly

Originally Posted by dunk

?

Suspension from further games is part of the punishment for the crime of being sent from the field of play, for breaking the laws of the game. If you didn't break any rules and were snet off in error, why should you be punished further?

Ok fine but for some reason you're dead set againsat changing results based on errors the ref has made. I don't see the difference myself. And you don't seem very keen to give your reasons why you're so against it.


Rescinding red cards is a very recent "change of policy" and I don't remember the game disappearing up its arse for the 100 odd years we managed without rescinding them.