Retrospective Diving Bans

[kaz7]

Lets see if it works,walker didn't touch the guy but got sent off,this is when it was supposed to be reviewed,sendings off and penalties,unless they say well it was 2 yellows and not a straight red,forever a loop hole

 

[MillionMilesAway]

But it doesn't change the fact that we played half the game with 10 players. This system is open to abuse, and everyone knows it.

No, it doesn't.
However, nowadays, people will be looking for trends in how these bans are given out and which refs are suckers/on the take for a player taking one for the team. There isn't really anything that can be done about that without VAR.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Lets see if it works,walker didn't touch the guy but got sent off,this is when it was supposed to be reviewed,sendings off and penalties,unless they say well it was 2 yellows and not a straight red,forever a loop hole

The simulation rule specifically allows a second yellow to be overturned when there's a sending off (not sure if it applies to the first yellow as well).
Either they review it or they don't (and declare it's not simulation).
If they do review it, the random 3 chosen views (from 12) must be unanimous that it's simulation to overturn it.

However, they only meet on Mondays, so the next review will be after City's next match.
I assume it must be possible to play under appeal, but I suspect City will choose to accept and exclude him against Bournemouth, rather than risk not having Walker vs Liverpool.

 

[SWP's back]

The simulation rule specifically allows a second yellow to be overturned when there's a sending off (not sure if it applies to the first yellow as well).
Either they review it or they don't (and declare it's not simulation).
If they do review it, the random 3 chosen views (from 12) must be unanimous that it's simulation to overturn it.

However, they only meet on Mondays, so the next review will be after City's next match.
I assume it must be possible to play under appeal, but I suspect City will choose to accept and exclude him against Bournemouth, rather than risk not having Walker vs Liverpool.

That just confirms the whole thing is bollocks.

We are cheated out of a player for 60 mins, they can't be arsed meeting before next week AND we have to take the ban anyway so we don't risk them fucking up an obvious error.

 

[lancs blue]

It's quite clear that Oliver gave the nod for Walker's 2nd yellow. If Madley has any sort of backbone (yes, I know!) he would have looked at the TV footage and recommended that the 2nd yellow was scrubbed as initially he clearly had no intention of issuing a card.

 

[Patientman63]

This player was up to it all night, very subtle with it, mainly does it when under pressure at full back, but is not above trying it higher up the pitch, where luckily he got caught a few times. He was really getting on my tits by the end of it. Wonder if he'll get retrospectively reviewed?

 

[kaz7]

The simulation rule specifically allows a second yellow to be overturned when there's a sending off (not sure if it applies to the first yellow as well).
Either they review it or they don't (and declare it's not simulation).
If they do review it, the random 3 chosen views (from 12) must be unanimous that it's simulation to overturn it.

However, they only meet on Mondays, so the next review will be after City's next match.
I assume it must be possible to play under appeal, but I suspect City will choose to accept and exclude him against Bournemouth, rather than risk not having Walker vs Liverpool.

Thank you for explaining it,should be looked at then,my money is no action but we'll see

 

[MCFC1993]

 

[MillisleBlue]

Strongly suspect that retrospective diving bans will be used strategically to benefit a few cash-cow teams and unfairly disadvantage others.

 

[kaz7]

FFS screwed over again