Terry's Sending Off

leninbenjamin · 16-09-2008 7:31pm

Iago wrote: »

No matter what we compare it to there's no excuse for it, if that wasn't "serious foul play" then what is? It was a blatant and successful attempt to break the rules and prevent an opposition player from scoring a goal. In my view it's no different than a defender being outpaced and deciding to slide in and take a players ankle from behind 30 yards out from goal.

serious foul play is the use of excessive force, has nothing to do with whether or not it was a professional foul. obviously Rugby tackles are considered just a new tactical element to the game. ridiculous ruling but not at all unexpected.

CHD · 16-09-2008 7:34pm

leninbenjamin wrote: »

serious foul play is the use of excessive force, has nothing to do with whether or not it was a professional foul. obviously Rugby tackles are considered just a new tactical element to the game. ridiculous ruling but not at all unexpected.

Stop being so bitter will you.Its not a red card.Get over it.

eagle eye · 16-09-2008 7:42pm

This shows the power of the English players and top four sides. If this was a player who was not either of the above, there was no chance of this being overturned.

It is grossly unfair to overturn this decision, the referee has been made to look like a fool. Another bad move by the English FA.

Villain · 16-09-2008 8:41pm

Eagle eye can you not see if the FA didn't over rule the Ref they would have made many many more Ref's look like fools, I actually think the Ref last night in the Villa put the nail in the coffin with his decision to give Dawson a yellow after his tackle on Young which was worse than Terry's.

The cynical foul isn't a new thing its just when the English Captain does it on Live TV it gets more attention, players for years and years have been taking Yellow cards to break counter attacks down if you want to start cutting them out now then fair enough but you can't have one ref deciding to do it on his own with all the remaining refs carrying on as normal.

As I said before I have to think that some people who demand a red card for Terry have never played the game and the only Soccer they see is MOTD or Super Sunday, seriously these fouls happen week in week out.

CHD · 16-09-2008 8:47pm

/endthread

eagle eye · 16-09-2008 8:58pm

Villain wrote: »

Eagle eye can you not see if the FA didn't over rule the Ref they would have made many many more Ref's look like fools, I actually think the Ref last night in the Villa put the nail in the coffin with his decision to give Dawson a yellow after his tackle on Young which was worse than Terry's.

The cynical foul isn't a new thing its just when the English Captain does it on Live TV it gets more attention, players for years and years have been taking Yellow cards to break counter attacks down if you want to start cutting them out now then fair enough but you can't have one ref deciding to do it on his own with all the remaining refs carrying on as normal.

As I said before I have to think that some people who demand a red card for Terry have never played the game and the only Soccer they see is MOTD or Super Sunday, seriously these fouls happen week in week out.

I played soccer for a long time, I used to go to a lot of games but not so many these days.
I seen that challenge and I immediately thought to myself, thats a straight red. The reasons for my thinking were as follows. Firstly I was certain that Jo was away and gone and secondly Terry stood on his foot and when it did not stop him, he rugby tackled him to the ground.
The stamp did not cause any damage but it could have caused serious injury if it was timed right, the tackle was just ridiculous.
I have had this done to me maybe twice in my lifetime in open play, a couple more times during set pieces where there were many players in the box and less chance of the ref seeing it. This foul was flagrant and committed in clear view of the ref, that makes a huge difference.
The ref had no doubt in his mind at the time of the incident and to be fair to him he stood by his decision. He is one of the better referees in the premiership and he does not deserve to be treated this badly. Basically what has gone on here is that the England International team/top four clubs have shown the same player power/club power that has made a mockery of England Managers over the last couple of years.

Villain · 16-09-2008 9:05pm

eagle eye wrote: »

I played soccer for a long time, I used to go to a lot of games but not so many these days.
I seen that challenge and I immediately thought to myself, thats a straight red. The reasons for my thinking were as follows. Firstly I was certain that Jo was away and gone and secondly Terry stood on his foot and when it did not stop him, he rugby tackled him to the ground.
The stamp did not cause any damage but it could have caused serious injury if it was timed right, the tackle was just ridiculous.
I have had this done to me maybe twice in my lifetime in open play, a couple more times during set pieces where there were many players in the box and less chance of the ref seeing it. This foul was flagrant and committed in clear view of the ref, that makes a huge difference.
The ref had no doubt in his mind at the time of the incident and to be fair to him he stood by his decision. He is one of the better referees in the premiership and he does not deserve to be treated this badly. Basically what has gone on here is that the England International team/top four clubs have shown the same player power/club power that has made a mockery of England Managers over the last couple of years.

The thing is whether or not you think was a professional foul doesn't matter as thats not what he was sent off for or what the appeal was for, imo it wasn't as Carvalho was behind him and would have got a tackle in.

If you consider what Terry did to be Serious Foul play then I really think you must have played in a very soft league and don't watch much football, take e.g. Dawson's tackle last night it was worse than Terry's and got a yellow as do many many tackles simalar every week, you can't look at one incident in isolation you have to look at what ref's have been doing for the past years, it was a cynical foul that broke down an attack nothing more nothing less.

Oh and if you think standing on a players foot is serious foul play you must spend an awful lot of time looking at games where the ref's get it so wrong, yet I don't see you talking about them.

Jazzy · 16-09-2008 9:57pm

if it was some schmuck at bolton or fulham it wouldnt have been revoked. id put the bank on that

eagle eye · 16-09-2008 10:04pm

Villain wrote: »

The thing is whether or not you think was a professional foul doesn't matter as thats not what he was sent off for or what the appeal was for, imo it wasn't as Carvalho was behind him and would have got a tackle in.

If you consider what Terry did to be Serious Foul play then I really think you must have played in a very soft league and don't watch much football, take e.g. Dawson's tackle last night it was worse than Terry's and got a yellow as do many many tackles simalar every week, you can't look at one incident in isolation you have to look at what ref's have been doing for the past years, it was a cynical foul that broke down an attack nothing more nothing less.

Oh and if you think standing on a players foot is serious foul play you must spend an awful lot of time looking at games where the ref's get it so wrong, yet I don't see you talking about them.

Soft game, wtf? Just throw in an old insult there to back up your point.
Its clear we see this from different perspectives and will not agree on it. So be it.
And standing is not what I said, Stamping is what I said. It very dangerous and I'm certain you are aware of that.
But don't come to me with this old, 'I played harder football than you did or if you don't understand my point you must not have played football or you played soft football.'
I played for years, I'm sure there are plenty of lads on there who did also and then plenty that didn't but still know the rules of the game.
Just because people disagree it does not mean that either side is wrong. If you read my post above as well, I was also saying that this being overturned would not have happened if the players was not a top four club/ England International. Thats the more important issue now.

Villain · 16-09-2008 10:08pm

Jazzy wrote: »

if it was some schmuck at bolton or fulham it wouldnt have been revoked. id put the bank on that

I bet if it was some guy from Wolves and his appeal was successful, you wouldn't see a thread about it here

mobby · 16-09-2008 10:37pm

Villain wrote: »

I bet if it was some guy from Wolves and his appeal was successful, you wouldn't see a thread about it here

+1 Just about to say the same thing.

eagle eye · 16-09-2008 10:38pm

Villain wrote: »

I bet if it was some guy from Wolves and his appeal was successful, you wouldn't see a thread about it here

And you point is that a thread on here makes a difference??

kmart6 · 16-09-2008 10:52pm

Jazzy wrote: »

if it was some schmuck at bolton or fulham it wouldnt have been revoked. id put the bank on that

There's prob be an extra game put on it for the sake of it!

Advantages of being England captian eh!:rolleyes:

PHB · 16-09-2008 11:02pm

I agree that it was not a red for either offenses, although personally I can see the red for the serious stamp.

What perplexs me is that the ref gave it for serious foul play, the 4th official confirmed this. As such, has he reviewed the incident and decided it wasn't? He had a pretty clear view of it. Can't see this happening for any other player, indeed red cards that were even less earned have resulted in extra bans for players just appealing!

leninbenjamin · 16-09-2008 11:10pm

Villain wrote: »

The thing is whether or not you think was a professional foul doesn't matter as thats not what he was sent off for or what the appeal was for, imo it wasn't as Carvalho was behind him and would have got a tackle in.

If you consider what Terry did to be Serious Foul play then I really think you must have played in a very soft league and don't watch much football, take e.g. Dawson's tackle last night it was worse than Terry's and got a yellow as do many many tackles simalar every week, you can't look at one incident in isolation you have to look at what ref's have been doing for the past years, it was a cynical foul that broke down an attack nothing more nothing less.

Oh and if you think standing on a players foot is serious foul play you must spend an awful lot of time looking at games where the ref's get it so wrong, yet I don't see you talking about them.

i'll accept your point about refs setting the precedent in this case, but i disagree with you're comment about 'soft football'. read the rules on FIFA's site, it makes it pretty obvious that there are red card offences going unpunished in each match. I'd prefer to see a game where these rules are abided by, sure there'd be initial whinging and moaning, but go through that it would be better for the game, we'd see less cynical fouls and more goal scoring opportunities. that's the spirit of the game, not kicking the sh*te out of your opponent as Andy Gray would have believe.

seriously though the refs are becoming a pisstake, i can't remember watching a match recently where there shouldn't have been a red card...

Frisbee · 17-09-2008 12:27am

Boggles wrote: »

As it stand now Terry didn't even get a yellow.

I cant believe the Fa overturned this decision. So they are now saying that what John Terry did didnt even warrant a yellow card?
Football players are now allowed to rugby tackle their opponent at a whim without fear of retribution or punishment?
FA have embarrassed themselves here to protect their precious "JT"

Mr Alan wrote: »

Terrys tackle would be laughed at in a Rugby match.

Thats a great point you made, well done

CHD wrote: »

/endthread

fail

John Terry committed a professional foul
The ref gave him a red
Lampard and Chelsea had a moan
An Appeal was raised
The FA have decided blatant rugby tackles are now legal in football

..............................

Good to see justice was served...

CHD · 17-09-2008 1:22am

Frisbee wrote: »

fail

John Terry committed a professional foul
The ref gave him a red
Lampard and Chelsea had a moan
An Appeal was raised
The FA have decided blatant rugby tackles are now legal in football

..............................

Good to see justice was served...

Success, no?

17-09-2008 8:05am

Villain wrote: »

I bet if it was some guy from Wolves and his appeal was successful, you wouldn't see a thread about it here

Guy from Wolves would have had his ban extended for appealing and giving the FA extra work to do, thats the difference.

17-09-2008 8:07am

At least Fergie has the balls to question this, whats the bets they ban him?!

Hobart · 17-09-2008 8:18am

Deleted User wrote: »

At least Fergie has the balls to question this, whats the bets they ban him?!

FERGIE SPEAKS OUT ABOUT SOMETHING THAT MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT HIS TEAMS RESULTS SHOCKER. HOLD THE FRONT PAGE....

Never expected that tbh

jaykay74 · 17-09-2008 8:25am

A bit ironic that the Respect program is undermined by the refs chief

Mark Halsey, the referee who awarded the card, has been banished to League Two as punishment.

Ferguson has a history of enmity with Hackett and accused him of pressurising Halsey into the decision -- eventually the red card was overturned by a Football Association independent commission.

"My information is that Hackett told Mark Halsey to rescind the red card and he would not do it," said Ferguson. "Now I understand that Halsey is being made to referee in League Two this weekend. I just don't understand how this could have happened. If it had been a Manchester United player, Hackett would never have done this for us."

Halsey now has the ignominy of refereeing Chester City against Shrewsbury Town on Sunday. It is the second time in seven months that Chelsea, who are serial appealers in the disciplinary process, have successfully had a red card rescinded.

CHD · 17-09-2008 8:32am

Deleted User wrote: »

At least Fergie has the balls to question this, whats the bets they ban him?!

Wow , Shocking!

Fergie moaning because he doesnt agree with something :rolleyes:

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 8:39am

CHD wrote: »

Success, no?

no, fail. You said "/endthread" and the thread quite clearly did not end.

CHD · 17-09-2008 8:44am

Tauren wrote: »

no, fail. You said "/endthread" and the thread quite clearly did not end.

I said it because the thread should end there.But if united supporters want to moan some more then who am i to stop them.

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 9:04am

Ah so we should stop discussing any event once the outcome is determined. I'll let the mods know you would like all the match threads from yesterday closed.

CHD · 17-09-2008 9:11am

No discuss away....
Maybe stop being bitter and supporting the ref because he sent off John Terry

Villain · 17-09-2008 9:14am

You have to Laugh at Fergie, if it was RIO that this happened to you can be sure Utd would have appealed and Fergie would have welcomed the decision.

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 9:15am

CHD wrote: »

No discuss away....
Maybe stop being bitter and supporting the ref because he sent off John Terry

my issue is that stamping on someones foot then diving to haul them down from behind as they run through for potentially a good chance on goal is now not even to be considered a yellow card offence.

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 9:17am

Villain wrote: »

You have to Laugh at Fergie, if it was RIO that this happened to you can be sure Utd would have appealed and Fergie would have welcomed the decision.

Of course fergie would have appealed - it is his duty to United do so - i have no problem with chelsea appealing the decision. It is the fact it had been overturned which means the 'tackle' from Terry is not even considered a yellow card offence that is annoying.

Also, no way the FA would have overturned the decision for Rio - are you forgetting the fact they banned Rio for 8 months, a couple of weeks after fining a Man City player two weeks wages for the exact same offence (the Man City player said he had to go to the airport).

Mr Alan · 17-09-2008 9:20am

whereas Rio had to go shopping ;)wink wink;)

CHD · 17-09-2008 9:23am

Tauren wrote: »

my issue is that stamping on someones foot then diving to haul them down from behind as they run through for potentially a good chance on goal is now not even to be considered a yellow card offence.

No its your cover up to moan about John Terry ''getting away with it'' etc etc

Chelsea get all the luck dont they, United never get things there way :rolleyes:

It is a yellow card imo though.

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 9:25am

Mr Alan wrote: »

whereas Rio had to go shopping ;)wink wink;)

Yeah, Rio screwed up (and was cleared of drug taking by the test he took either later that day or the following day, can't remember which) but the FACT is that he received an 8 month ban for something another player only got a 2 week fine for a couple of weeks earlier, so to suggest Rio would have been treated with any sort of favourable reaction from the FA is simply baseless. The same FA that haned out 4 game bans to Scholes and Rooney for stupid non-red card offences in a pre-season tournament in Holland (while also NOT enforcing the red card recieved in a pre-season tournament by a Sheffield United player (i think))

Villain · 17-09-2008 9:25am

Tauren wrote: »

Of course fergie would have appealed - it is his duty to United do so - i have no problem with chelsea appealing the decision. It is the fact it had been overturned which means the 'tackle' from Terry is not even considered a yellow card offence that is annoying.

Also, no way the FA would have overturned the decision for Rio - are you forgetting the fact they banned Rio for 8 months, a couple of weeks after fining a Man City player two weeks wages for the exact same offence (the Man City player said he had to go to the airport).

It couldn't have been downgraded to a yellow becuase he was sent off for serious foul play.

Mr Alan · 17-09-2008 9:26am

Tauren wrote: »

to suggest Rio would have been treated with any sort of favourable reaction from the FA is simply baseless.

or MAYBE, its fair enough to suggest the FA would deal with an appeal for a card differently than they would treat a potential drugs cheat? maybe

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 9:27am

CHD wrote: »

No its your cover up to moan about John Terry ''getting away with it'' etc etc

Chelsea get all the luck dont they, United never get things there way :rolleyes:

It is a yellow card imo though.

Terry did get away with it and it is clearly NOT a yellow card in the eyes of the FA as a red card can not be downgraded to yellow - it is either red or not a cardable offence.

Villain · 17-09-2008 9:29am

Tauren wrote: »

so to suggest Rio would have been treated with any sort of favourable reaction from the FA is simply baseless.

It wouldn't have to be favourable to get the red card overturned if it was the same as Terry, the problem is UTD fans think it was favourable simply because it was Terry, the same thing happens week in week out its only when it happens to the Chelsea captain the week before they play UTD that people throw their toys of their pram

CHD · 17-09-2008 9:29am

So they can't downgrade, reckoned it wasn't a sending off and it was rescinded.

Right thing was done.

CHD · 17-09-2008 9:30am

Villain wrote: »

It wouldn't have to be favourable to get the red card overturned if it was the same as Terry, the problem is UTD fans think it was favourable simply because it was Terry, the same thing happens week in week out its only when it happens to the Chelsea captain the week before they play UTD that people throw their toys of their pram

Probably beat United without him aswell :pac:

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 9:30am

Mr Alan wrote: »

or MAYBE, its fair enough to suggest the FA would deal with an appeal for a card differently than they would treat a potential drugs cheat? maybe

So how does that stack up with the potential drugs cheat Man City player who was guilty of the exact same offence as Rio? Rio was treated differently for no acceptable reason.

And Scholes/Rooney red cards from the Amsterdam tournaments - the FA handed them 4 game bans despite one of them clearly being a bad call in the first place (Rooney's i think) and at the same time letting a Sheffield United player (think it was) off the red card he received. I think either Arsenal or Liverpool had a player sent off in the same tournament in a previous preseason and their ban was not carried into the premiership season either.

The FA don't do United favours.

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 9:32am

CHD wrote: »

So they can't downgrade, reckoned it wasn't a sending off and it was rescinded.

Right thing was done.

In doing so that decided it was not a cardable offence. You think that is right.

CHD · 17-09-2008 9:33am

Tauren wrote: »

In doing so that decided it was not a cardable offence. You think that is right.

I think its a yellow.But if they think that its not a red and should have been a yellow what else can they do? It would be a unfair ruling and basically have to be rescinded, no?

JT shouldn't have to suffer a 3 game ban if the foul is judged to be a yellow.

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 9:37am

CHD wrote: »

I think its a yellow.But if they think that its not a red and should have been a yellow what else can they do? It would be a unfair ruling and basically have to be rescinded, no?

JT shouldn't have to suffer a 3 game ban if the foul is judged to be a yellow.

fair enough - i disagree.

CHD · 17-09-2008 9:41am

Tauren wrote: »

fair enough - i disagree.

Obviously, but people wouldn't be complaining if Gallas got off or Woodgate or someone, and peoples defence of he wouldn't get off, only Terry would, is stupid.

Man United fans and football fans in general hate Terry and thats why theres people complaining.Its a joke.

Mr Alan · 17-09-2008 9:59am

i dont like like Terry at all and i think the FA have made the right decision.

I'm famed for my impartiality me

podge018 · 17-09-2008 10:03am

The offence he was sent off for can not be a yellow as you cannot give a yellow card for serious foul play.

Again:

Terry was given a red card for 'serious foul play'.

Chelsea appealed that it wasn't serious foul play.

FA agreed with this.

A red card can not be downgraded to a yellow.

To get a red card rescinded you have to prove that what you were sent off for was not worthy of even a yellow.

Serious foul play is red card offence.

You cannot get a yellow for serious foul play.

Red card rescinded as Chelsea proved that what he was sent off for was not worthy of a yellow card (it's impossible).

The Rooster · 17-09-2008 10:07am

Tauren wrote: »

Yeah, Rio screwed up (and was cleared of drug taking by the test he took either later that day or the following day, can't remember which)

Bull to say Rio was cleared of drug taking. Rio has never tested positive but he deliberately avoided being tested that day and a lot of drugs (in particular many recreational drugs) will be out of the system after 24 hours. That's why he got the 8 month ban, and there were clear differences in his case and the other case.

As for Terry, I believe Ferguson got it wrong. Terry getting off had little to do with him being a Chelsea player and a lot to do with him being "JT England Captain Fantastic". Carvalho would have been banned in my opinion if it had been him.

17-09-2008 10:11am

Tauren wrote: »

The FA don't do United favours.

Yeah they leave the Referees to do that with their mad stop watches

On topic, it was a fair decision imo to have the suspension reviewed. The United fans that are complaining here are just pissed off because you're playing them on Sunday & Johnny will be playing. Lets hope he gets a header for a 1-1 result

Mitch Connor · 17-09-2008 10:16am

The Rooster wrote: »

Bull to say Rio was cleared of drug taking. Rio has never tested positive but he deliberately avoided being tested that day and a lot of drugs (in particular many recreational drugs) will be out of the system after 24 hours. That's why he got the 8 month ban, and there were clear differences in his case and the other case.

Having looked into it - the testers REFUSED to give him the test that day.

Regardless, the Man City player got a 2 week fine for the same offence a couple of weeks before Rio got suspended for 8 months. Explain how that is fair. What were the differences? Rio went shopping while the City player went to the airport? If Rio had gone airport shopping would he have been ok?

Muff_Daddy · 17-09-2008 5:45pm

The way I see it, Terry was given a red card (rightly or wrongly is irrelevant, imo it could very well be deemed as a red) Chelsea complain, Lampard has a cry to the media, and it's overturned. You're always told the ref's decision is final, and there's no point complaining. Where do we draw the line? Does this only extend to on the pitch? This is a win for the Ashley Cole's of this world, and gives them licence to moan at the ref all they want. Respect the ref my hole.

And for anyone who thinks JT being England captain has no bearing, Alliadare (sp?) was sent off last season for caressing Mascharano's cheek, and on appeal, his ban was extended for being 'frivolous'. Chelsea's appeal as far as I'm concerned is 10 times more 'frivolous', and his ban is overturned. Think about why that is for a second.

And, I feel it's important to say I'm not a Man Yoo fan.

eagle eye · 17-09-2008 6:16pm

I am totally disgusted by all of this. Halsey is one of the better Premiership referees and this is just crazy.
The Premiership referees have now been told in no uncertain terms that you do not send off a top four club player unless he does something scandalous.
The definition of scandalous has also been rewrote for Premiership Referees.
Both Terry and Vidic should have received red cards the weekend. Mark Halsey did his job the weekend, Howard Webb did not.

Terry's Sending Off

Comments