No action against Lukaku

[manimanc]

Photos just in of the panel reviewing the lukaku incident.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Rojo and Fellaini last season, Lukaku this. Won't be the last, mark my words. They've got too many poor tempers and self entitled opinions in that dressing room, starting at the top with the moaning one, and not enough discipline to keep it controlled in a season when they will hopefully remain playing anti-football to attempt to catch up to an exciting footballing side, whilst being overtaken by others who prefer a pass to a push, elbow or stamp.

I hope if anything it brings to the forefront for fans of all clubs to see, the preferential treatment the rags get. That, in combination with the complete contrast in football styles happening right now, is worth more than a ban longer term for our own ambitions.

I always hoped that we'd turn things around to be the superior team in Manchester and nearby boroughs and cement that, but if as part of that process they also get revealed as cheating dickheads then even better.

Fucking hell, I’d forgotten about Rojo and his 2 assaults last year, they were even worse than this.

 

[PW]

Was anyone really that surprise. They get away with it all the time and to think what Kyle Walker got sent off for in comparison is laughable.

 

[roj]

Should’ve been a ban but like many have said, I’d rather he starts against us instead of the Swedish guy. If the game goes as most expect it will, they’re gonna need someone who can hold up a long ball, retain some precious possession and bring the rest of the ****s into play.

 

[kaz7]

He is odds on to injure at least one of our players and score a goal now,shocking by the FA

 

[mscenterh750]

Surprise fucking surprise no action taken against Hong Kong Lukaku.

Wankers the of them fa, rags and everybody associated with that shit club.

 

[Blue Til Death]

Its a fuckin disgrace, I know the ref says he didn't see it but that Incident was just before their jammy goal... Surely the lino saw it, the FA panel certainly did but still no action..!

 

[TCIB]

yes I kind of see the point but when the system is this broke then things have to change

Oh i agree boss, this is me looking for a silver lining really hehe.

 

[Paladin]

I’m not sure why people are getting hung up on Lukaku’s act being one of petulance, or otherwise. As far as I am aware, only Dermot Gallagher, a former referee, has used this as the reason further action should not be taken. The FA hasn’t made a distinction between petulance and violent conduct.

Law 12 of The Laws of the Game says:

“VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.”

I assume the FA Review Panel deemed that Lukaku acted with negligible force, and that is why he wasn’t sanctioned.

You can’t really argue with this, as Lukaku hardly made contact with the Brighton player, and he didn’t seem to even notice the attempt from Lukaku. It will be interesting to see how the FA deal with similar incidents that don’t involve a United player though.

 

[ancoats]

Was anyone really that surprise. They get away with it all the time and to think what Kyle Walker got sent off for in comparison is laughable.

and walker took is punishment without any moaning

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Well thats the Precedent set! if 3 referees can’t see that’s a ban, if any other player an important player of a club that this player will miss a very important game does Similar and gets a 3 game ban can that club take legal action or is it that’s that no come back.

Only takes one of them not to agree, not all of them.

I agree, the precedent is 'interesting' when the next one comes around. I imagine by the end of the next week there will be one.

 

[RuncornBlue]

They've pulled the videos from the Sky Sports articles, so you can't rewatch it on there now.

 

[manimanc]

Rumour has it the panel was ex rag gobshite schmechel, ex rag gobshite Robson and ex rag gobshite Yorke. Seems fair to me.

 

[TCIB]

I’m not sure why people are getting hung up on Lukaku’s act being one of petulance, or otherwise. As far as I am aware, only Dermot Gallagher, a former referee, has used this as the reason further action should not be taken. The FA hasn’t made a distinction between petulance and violent conduct.

Law 12 of The Laws of the Game says:

“VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.”

I assume the FA Review Panel deemed that Lukaku acted with negligible force, and that is why he wasn’t sanctioned.

You can’t really argue with this, as Lukaku hardly made contact with the Brighton player, and he didn’t seem to even notice the attempt from Lukaku. It will be interesting to see how the FA deal with similar incidents that don’t involve a United player though.

Kicking out reasonably hard with the ball nowhere to be seen directly aimed at an opponent meets the requirements for excessive force, surely?

They need more clarity on the rules then imo.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

System needs to change to a majority 3 out of 5 on the panel not a unanimous 3 out of 3. More importantly why are ex players even on the panel.

They aren't.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

They've pulled the videos from the Sky Sports articles, so you can't rewatch it on there now.

Really? Brilliant!
Nothing to hide here, move along.

 

[SilverFox2]

Somebody in the FA decided this incident worthy a look at.
They had a rule book and had as much time as they needed to arrive at their decision.

Perhaps it would be of benefit to everyone if the reason for it being referred was shown to be incorrect.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Somebody in the FA decided this incident worthy a look at.
They had a rule book and had as much time as they needed to arrive at their decision.

Perhaps it would be of benefit to everyone if the reason for it being referred was shown to be incorrect.

I don't think that follows.

The referral is made, with the question of "would you have sent him off for this?" I don't know how they make the decision to refer, but it was referred which suggests that that part of the system worked ok.

Edit: And first they have to wait for the ref's report to note that he didn't see the incident fully.

 

[sir baconface]

I was going to say unbelievable. On reflection, it isn’t.

Those cnuts still exert a lot of pull behind the scenes. To the football establishment, they are still box office (even in decline) while the likes of Brighton are JCLs of fcuk all merit.

If anyone broke the 3-line whip to say he should have been sent off, they’d be admitting the goal shouldn’t have been allowed either. And we can’t have that, can we?

Fcuk off you bent twats.

 

[Paladin]

Kicking out reasonably hard with the ball nowhere to be seen directly aimed at an opponent meets the requirements for excessive force, surely?

They need more clarity on the rules then imo.

I agree, he should have been sent off, and should have been retrospectively punished. But with three ex-referees deciding the outcome, and another publicly saying he didn’t think it was a sending off, there can be no surprise about the eventual outcome.

That whole system is corrupt though. How many referees have we seen favour United in the past? They are now ex-referees and eligible for this panel. Who appoints the panel? Riley? An FA member who supports United? They only need to appoint one closet United fan for them to get the decisions. Not only for them, but against other teams too. No doubt Taylor and Mason will become friendly insiders at some point.