Terry's Sending Off

DSB

Anyone else of the opinion that Halsey should definitely be disciplined for coming out and saying that he has gone with it for serious foul play? Fair enough if the man has made an honest error of judgement, but to come out and justify it with rubbish like that just makes him seem like he knew exactly what he was doing.

Mitch Connor

DSB wrote: »

Anyone else of the opinion that Halsey should definitely be disciplined for coming out and saying that he has gone with it for serious foul play?

No.

People have been screaming for Refs to explain their decisions, and when they do you want them strung up.

leninbenjamin

it was a rugby tackle. I think Hasley has to be praised for how he handled it.

OPENROAD

Tauren wrote: »

No.

People have been screaming for Refs to explain their decisions, and when they do you want them strung up.

+1

DSB

Tauren wrote: »

No.

People have been screaming for Refs to explain their decisions, and when they do you want them strung up.

It seemed more like an excuse than an explanation to me. I can't honestly believe he thought that. As was said after the Villa game, if referees sent players off for challenges like that every time, there'd be quite a few sendings off per game.

Mitch Connor

Yeah - i often see defenders deliberately body check the attacker with a dive as they run through on goal. A few times per game, obviously.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

DSB wrote: »

It seemed more like an excuse than an explanation to me. I can't honestly believe he thought that. As was said after the Villa game, if referees sent players off for challenges like that every time, there'd be quite a few sendings off per game.

...or maybe a more skillful game of football?

eagle eye

I think he was right too. I have nothing against Chelsea or John Terry. Fair play to Halsey, we need more refs like him in the prem.

Mr Alan

he wasnt right. not even nearly. if Terrys foul was a red card, i expect at least 4 every game from now on.

leninbenjamin

Mr Alan wrote: »

he wasnt right. not even nearly. if Terrys foul was a red card, i expect at least 4 every game from now on.

no you wouldn't. how often do players tackle each other like this?

Mr Alan

how often do players wrap their arms around another player as he trys to get away from his marker?

try every set piece.

its a foul. if he was the last man, as in CLEARLY the last man and within 25 yards of the goal-its a red card.

if he is not the last man and there is at least one definately, and possibly two defenders covering, and about 45 yards out, its not a red card.

leninbenjamin

Mr Alan wrote: »

how often do players wrap their arms around another player as he trys to get away from his marker?

try every set piece.

you don't see players diving through the air now trying to haul 'em down like Terry did. there's a better photo in one of the weekend papers that shows just how outrageous it was.

there's also a big difference between trying to get to the ball ahead of your marker like we usually see at set pieces, and just taking someone down because they've gotten past you.

Mr Alan

maybe i just totally misunderstand the rules of football, is tripping someone who goes past you a red card offence?

i thought only if it stopped a goal scoring chance and they were the last man. Terry wasnt. and it cant really be classed as a chance that far out.

super_furry

A deliberate and intentional foul committed with the express effort of stopping a goal-scoring chance, it's was a red card. The fact that it was on the England captain is the only reason there's all this media debate.

lordgoat

It's going to get alot of stick as it's the first time a ref has given a red for this offence against a high profile player. It was a particularly sneaky tackle. No he wasn't the last man/it wasn't a clear cut scoring opportunity so it prob should have been a yellow but if the ref deemed it seriously foul play - fair enough.

2 things.

If it wasn't Terry there would be less of a fuss.
If the next match wasn't against man u, there would be less fuss.


I'd love to see this type of foul upgradded to a red card, nothing more sickening than getting dragged down when running through.

Mr Alan

i couldnt give a ****e about the english media, when i saw the foul and red card, i said on the night that it should be overturned.

it wasnt a goalscoring chance, it was about 45 yards out, and he still had Carvalho comfortably ahead of him and Bosingwa (i think) also with a good chance of getting him within the next 45 yards!

kmart6

If this get's overturned it's a joke!!!

leninbenjamin

Mr Alan wrote: »

maybe i just totally misunderstand the rules of football, is tripping someone who goes past you a red card offence?

ummmm.... yes? didn't Guthrie get sent off for something like that at the weekend? of course it depends on a bunch of other variables...

Mr Alan wrote: »

i thought only if it stopped a goal scoring chance and they were the last man. Terry wasnt. and it cant really be classed as a chance that far out.

well that isn't relevant here as it wasn't deemed a professional foul, but you're wrong anway. according to the rules a professional foul is given in the event of a player illegally preventing a goal scoring opportunity. doesn't mention anything about the last man iirc. as a side note, i said it already had Terry not hauled jo down, Carvalho and Bosingwa weren't in position to get back in time, so should it should have been considered a professional foul.

DirkVoodoo

What annoys me is the pressure on the FA now from Lampard. I wasn't aware he carried any weight with them (other than the obvious fat frank joke - no, i must be strong!) and I can't understand why I am flicking onto teamtalk and the headlines are "Lampard appeals to FA to overturn red card" and "Lampard is sure Terry red card will be withdrawn" (paraphrasing them here).

Vidic's tackles were bad tackles, deserved yellow. Terry was caught wrong footed and tried to deceive the ref by wrapping his arm around the player as he dived. That's a pretty cycnical foul in my book and the kind of unsportsman like conduct you don't want to see in the game. A harsh red, maybe, but I think it should stand.

Mr Alan

so i am presuming you people all think that Vidics two yellows should be upgraded to a straight red? considering he chopped down Keane, who was 20 yards from goal and clean through?

machiavellianme

leninbenjamin wrote: »

no you wouldn't. how often do players tackle each other like this?

All blacks vs the Pumas?
Twas a bad foul but not sure its a straight red. There were much worse fouls this weekend that didnt get half enough attention.

OPENROAD

super_furry wrote: »

A deliberate and intentional foul committed with the express effort of stopping a goal-scoring chance, it's was a red card. The fact that it was on the England captain is the only reason there's all this media debate.

And a debate on an irish soccer board.

PHB

IMO, the red wasn't for his arm. It was for his feet. He didn't just knock him over with his arm to bring him down. He stamped on his foot first, then used his arm. If you can watch it again, look at how his right foot came down on Jo. Seriously dangerous. Serious foul play, straight red.

Carvalho was covering, theres no way he was denying a clear goal scoring opportunity.

leninbenjamin

Mr Alan wrote: »

so i am presuming you people all think that Vidics two yellows should be upgraded to a straight red? considering he chopped down Keane, who was 20 yards from goal and clean through?

yeah, i said it when i saw it that he should have been given a straight red.

Hobart

PHB wrote: »

Carvalho was covering, theres no way he was denying a clear goal scoring opportunity.

So the ref made an error in the Liverpool game so? Vidic should have gotten a straight red for denying Keane a clear goal scoring chance?

leninbenjamin

PHB wrote: »

Carvalho was covering, theres no way he was denying a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Carvalho wasn't covering. before Terry's foul Jo had skipped by him easily, had more momentum than Carvalho, a more direct line to goal and was about 6 to 8 yards (nearly the distance of the centre circle) to the right of Carvalho on the football pitch. it would have been asking an awful lot for Carvalho to have caught up with Jo, let alone successfully tackle. Terry knew what he was doing and prevented a potential 1 on 1 with the keeper; at some cost though.

~Rebel~

Hobart wrote: »

So the ref made an error in the Liverpool game so? Vidic should have gotten a straight red for denying Keane a clear goal scoring chance?

I think you missed what phb was saying, he was saying that the ref gave the red because of the badness of the foul, the stamp on jo before he pulled him, rather then for denying a goalscoring oppertunity. Which is what the ref said also.

Neither the Terry nor vidic incidents should have been straight reds for denying a clear goalscoring oppertunity, and neither were given a straight red for this incident. Vidic was given a yellow for a professional foul, Terry was given a red for dangerous play.

<edit>
on Carvalho, personally imo he had to be given the benefit of the doubt. He was nearer the goal and the incident was miles from the box. Carvalho is no slouch either, very very good chance he could have covered, and not enough doubt for that to be a red card that far from goal imo.

super_furry

Hobart wrote: »

So the ref made an error in the Liverpool game so? Vidic should have gotten a straight red for denying Keane a clear goal scoring chance?

Yes, he should have. The referee bottled it.

Hee rugby tackled Jo, he's been gettin away with that sh1t for years, should not be rescinded.


And hobart Vidic should have gone the 1st time. The ref fcked up.

Jazzy

anything bad that happens to John Terry im okay with

PHB

leninbenjamin wrote: »

Carvalho wasn't covering. before Terry's foul Jo had skipped by him easily, had more momentum than Carvalho, a more direct line to goal and was about 6 to 8 yards (nearly the distance of the centre circle) to the right of Carvalho on the football pitch. it would have been asking an awful lot for Carvalho to have caught up with Jo, let alone successfully tackle. Terry knew what he was doing and prevented a potential 1 on 1 with the keeper; at some cost though.

That's actually not really accurate.
Carvalho was 2 yards behind Terry, as well as about 6 yards to the right. He was in full sprint and really had it covered. It would have been a one on one, but still. He was defo the last man, in no way was he far enough away to be considered otherwise.

p.s. Just watching the incident again, I want to highlight just how amazing Carvalho is as a defender.
He started chasing back the moment he realised Terry was beaten.
Then he was about to intercept the ball as he thought Jo had knocked it on just a little too much.
Then when he realised that Terry had just fouled him, he sprinted behind him, in order to give the impression he was the last man to the ref.

If that isn't world class defending I don't know what is. As I said before, the most laughable thing about Terry getting the UEFA defender of the year award is that he's not even the best defender at Chelsea!

Harpy

anyone have a link for a video of this??missed it yesterday

x in the city

there's more consistency to be found in a yoghurt carton than referees these days.

john terrys was a clear sending off, ok so he is mr john terry and he gets 150k a week but its still a sending off none the less., its just getting coverage because its chelski.

also the peno incident at stoke was crazy, and tackle at newcastle.

refs have lost the plot tbh.

Soby

Im a chelsea fan and i accept is not gonna get overturned..Because from what ive read the foul must be seen to have not been worthy of a yellow card because a red cant be downgraded to a yellow..but the foul deserved a yellow..therefore i it wont the appeal more than likely will fail..

super_furry

Indeed. I watched the Stoke and Everton game yesterday and the referee was dreadful: disallowed a perfectly fine Stoke goal, gave Everton a free-kick when he should have (and did initially) award a penalty.

leninbenjamin

PHB wrote: »

That's actually not really accurate.
Carvalho was 2 yards behind Terry, as well as about 6 yards to the right. He was in full sprint and really had it covered. It would have been a one on one, but still. He was defo the last man, in no way was he far enough away to be considered otherwise.

Terry doesn't have to be the last man for it to be considered a professional foul, that's my point. with respect, i've watched the incident plenty of times and you're looking at the final positions more than the starting, but it's the starting positions that are more important here. you're also underestimating the impact Terry's foul had on Jo's momentum. Terry was caught so flat footed that the instant he made contact with Jo he was fouling him, and Carvalho wasn't at full sprint at the point. Jo would have barely had to swerve if it weren't for the lunge Terry made. And remember folks, the by the book, the benefit of the doubt is meant to be given to the attacker.

but I agree with you entirely on Carvalho as a defender. he's a sneaky ****er, but he's definitely head and shoulders above Terry in terms of ability.

edit: here's the link for Harpy
http://www.101greatgoals.com/videodisplay/1559706/

Hobart

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I think you missed what phb was saying, he was saying that the ref gave the red because of the badness of the foul, the stamp on jo before he pulled him, rather then for denying a goalscoring oppertunity. Which is what the ref said also.

Neither the Terry nor vidic incidents should have been straight reds for denying a clear goalscoring oppertunity, and neither were given a straight red for this incident. Vidic was given a yellow for a professional foul, Terry was given a red for dangerous play.
.

Ineed, bang on (with your point) I did mis-read it. I don't take the point that Carvaliho was covering, as he seemed to be a long way away, and to the right of the action, but you never know.


I was of the impression that both Vidic and Terry were the last defenders, maybe they were not?

<edit> Terry was not the last defender, and Carvalliho would probably have covered Jo, based on the link above.

leninbenjamin

Hobart wrote: »

I was of the impression that both Vidic and Terry were the last defenders, maybe they were not?

in both cases the partner was slightly behind, but a good distance offset so it would have been asking a lot to have made up the ground.

Hobart

leninbenjamin wrote: »

in both cases the partner was slightly behind, but a good distance offset so it would have been asking a lot to have made up the ground.

Yea, seen that in the Terry incident, any links to the Vidic one?

Skud

if im not mistaken a number of reds last season where upheld because the challenges at least deserved a yellow - or borderline red. if this card is recinded then id be surprised if the fa have changed their rules, plus are more leniant now... which i doubt, so terry out for next 3 games i guess...

leninbenjamin

Hobart wrote: »

Yea, seen that in the Terry incident, any links to the Vidic one?

101greatgoals has it. just go to the main page.

more specifically you'll need to watch the MOTD highlights. it's around 8 mins.

Hobart

leninbenjamin wrote: »

101greatgoals has it. just go to the main page.

Don't see it there, but thanks anyhow.

leninbenjamin

Hobart wrote: »

Don't see it there, but thanks anyhow.

yeah, i should have been more specific, sorry. i've the link above now.

eagle eye

I'd say that either of Vidic's ones could have been red. He stopped a clear goal scoring opportunity in the first one, no one was getting to Keane and he was last man back, and the second was a reckless challenge where he led with his arm, a very dangerous challenge.

Hobart

Vidic certainly looks to be the last man between Keane and VDS, don't see any players behind him or potentially covering for him.

~Rebel~

Hobart wrote: »

Vidic certainly looks to be the last man between Keane and VDS, don't see any players behind him or potentially covering for him.

thats a good shot there hobart. I was only watching it in action and Rio catches up very very fast, but at the time of the challenge it could definately be argued that he was the last defender and had the challenge not been made, Keane could have gotten a shot away unimpeded in or around the box. Intent is always important. By the looks of that, Vidic would have thought himself that he was last man back and so in his own mind was stopping a clear goalscoring opportunity.

p.s i feel like a plank. clicked the 'play' button on your image...

Frisbee

The ref gave a red for a professional foul where it was fully warranted. Terry went out of his way to pull Jo down because he knew Jo had him beaten.
It was cynical and professional. Perhaps he didnt deny a clear goal scoring opportunity but when you commit a professional foul where the referee has reasonable doubt that anyone could cover for you.
Even if Carvalho could have got back the ref is perfectly within his rights to give the red.

Watch this happen to someone like Lucas Neill or Woodgate later in the season and see if anyone even bats an eyelid... :rolleyes:

CHD

Mr Alan wrote: »

he wasnt right. not even nearly. if Terrys foul was a red card, i expect at least 4 every game from now on.

This...




Also with peoples hatred of Chelsea and Terry of course your all going to say its deserved.

leninbenjamin

CHD wrote: »

Also with peoples hatred of Chelsea and Terry of course your all going to say its deserved.

nah you have it arseways. most people hate Terry because he gets away with what IS deserved.

Smegball

Hobart wrote: »

Vidic certainly looks to be the last man between Keane and VDS, don't see any players behind him or potentially covering for him.

Sure Van Der Sar was stopping him, I'm sure he could of saved the day for United there :rolleyes: :pac:

Xavi6

I honestly didn't think it was a red card when I watching the game and if it happened to one of our players I'd be wanting the decision appealed too.