Oumar Niasse charged by FA

[Vienna_70]

Beware Young!!

It doesn't look to me that there's any contact at all.

Niasse - and Everton - doesn't have a case.

 

[the talisman]

Never a pen, 100% dive.
If he’s found guilty, what’s to stop Palace getting lawyered up and suing for 2 more points?

 

[Dubai Blue]

It doesn't look to me that there's any contact at all.

Niasse - and Everton - doesn't have a case.

Whether it warranted a penalty or not is certainly up for debate, but there was clearly contact (Dann's arm across his shoulder/chest).

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Looked a dive after a little contact but football is never or rarely open & shut.

Raz was shoved in the back in the area last night and Keown said it was nothing, mind you the commentator made him look a **** last night when he was screaming for a Dutch pen for much less contact later in the game.

 

[Rolee]

It doesn't look to me that there's any contact at all.

Niasse - and Everton - doesn't have a case.

It's obstruction, or impeding a players progress I believe they call it now. Does Dann not step across Niasse and body check him?

He made a meal of it, no doubt but for me that should be an indirect freekick.

 

[bluemc1]

He did go down easy ric but for me it was a clear obstruction as he put his arm across the player without playing the ball if bog brush head would have done that to Jesus we would all be screaming blue murder.

Agree, yes he was looking for it and went down very easy but I thought the first ban would come from an incident with zero contact
Might be good overall though as might stop players just going down at slightest touch

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

stinks, Everton accept the charge even though Niasse denied it. Seems Everton will get more favours and in turn it's set a very dubious precedent now for them to go after the kind of justified penalties we've been getting. Now 3 people in a room can overrule the referee even if there's contact, which should be the line drawn on such decisions. Only dives like Rashford v Swansea last season should be being targeted, not ones where there's a bit of contact so therefore it becomes subjective.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

stinks even more with the reasoning "exaggerated the effect of normal contact". what's normal contact? seems they've deliberately stitched Niasse up so they have a precedent to go after the likes of Bernardo which clearly riled them. now you can be banned for being fouled, this is really dodgy ground

 

[Newman Noggs]

stinks even more with the reasoning "exaggerated the effect of normal contact". what's normal contact? seems they've deliberately stitched Niasse up so they have a precedent to go after the likes of Bernardo which clearly riled them. now you can be banned for being fouled, this is really dodgy ground

Very dodgy indeed as will be video replays. I trust that someone will compile a league table of clubs who have decisions go against them following review in both instances. I'd put money on us finishing highest of the top 6 clubs with someone like Stoke at the top.

 

[bluetonium]

This decision troubles me. Yes, he went down very easy but there was some contact. Not enough and he bought the penalty maybe. But dann does make contact with him. How a panel of three 'experts' can come to the decision that they would all have given that as a dive without a shadow of doubt is puzzling. The video evidence just don't back it up, so they've taken a leap towards interpretation I feel.

Based on this I'm surprised we didn't see B Silva and Sterling banned already (not saying they dived but the interpretation is wide open now) and looking at last nights highlights then surely Ayew faces a ban now too.

Can of worms.