Tevez is clean through, Djourou lunges in and takes him clean out. It's a foul, no doubt in anyones mind, there's no other defender within yards so Djourou is clearly the last man, the ball goes flying away from the challenge and into Fabianski's arms. Every single City fan in the stadium is up in arms, demanding a red card, it's the only decision the ref can make, it's a clear goal scoring opportunity, the ref sends off Djourou. After the game an Arsenal fan comes on Bluemoon and claims it WASN'T a sending off, that Tevez wouldn't have reached the ball, what's the reaction? 99.9% of people on Bluemoon will slate the Arsenal fan, claiming of course Tevez would have reached it, that he would undoubtedly have got a shot off and, on current form, he'd have likely scored. What's the difference between that situation and the Boyata one? The colour of the shirts, that's it. Those suggesting it wasn't a red card need to realise that, on occasion, a decision can go against City and yet still be the right decision.
Whether Chamakh would have reached the ball will always be a subjective issue, he wasn't given the chance to do so by Boyata so it will always be, at best, a matter of opinion whether he would have reached it or not, there are no FACTS in this. Watching replays over and over again and trying to extrapolate the speed of the ball, the (assumed) speed Chamakh would have run, the speed Hart came off his line, and coming to a decision isn't ever going to be conclusive, so to say Clattenburg was wrong to send him off is incorrect. If "in the referees opinion" a clear goalscoring opportunity was prevented then a red card was the only possible outcome.
