Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
He tripped him, not kicked him. It was a so-called professional foul to stop Zab getting in behind him. The FA panel decided it wouldn't have warranted a red card and (regretfully) that's probably the right decision.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Puncheon trip on Zaba goes unpunished...
- Thread starter BandwagonJumper
- Start date
Rammy Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 May 2008
- Messages
- 30,640
Pointless banning him after the fact anyway, unless it's a direct rival of ours I don't want a "decent" player banning - not checked fixtures but say Palace have got Chelsea coming up then they benefit not us if he's banned, fucking stupid.He tripped him, not kicked him. It was a so-called professional foul to stop Zab getting in behind him. The FA panel decided it wouldn't have warranted a red card and (regretfully) that's probably the right decision.
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
As long as they're wearing light blue.If kicking someone in the complete absence of a football, isn't violent conduct, then can I kick a few people ?
sir baconface
Well-Known Member
Whilst I'm of the opinion that it's just a yellow for that type of offence this does set a precedent, ultimately the FA are saying it's perfectly fine to cynically trip someone off the ball if the officials don't see it.
The FA reviewed it and (correctly IMO) judged it not to be a red card offence. Are you suggesting retrospective impositions of yellow cards? They would be as busy as fcuk in both senses of the word.
Yes, the guy's a cynical little toad and he got away with it, as do dozens of players committing fouls every week. Surely it's best for the game that only the more serious cases are reviewed.
Last edited:
They reviewed it and (correctly IMO) judged it not to be a red card offence. Are you suggesting retrospective impositions of yellow cards?
I'm not suggesting anything
dannyboy29
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 1,282
If they have reviewed it I'm surprised Zabba has been banned.
sir baconface
Well-Known Member
The FA reviewed it and (correctly IMO) judged it not to be a red card offence. Are you suggesting retrospective impositions of yellow cards? They would be as busy as fcuk in both senses of the word.
I'm not suggesting anything
Then since you've agreed it was a yellow card offence, and aren't suggesting retrospective yellows, what is the precedent that is bothering you?
Then since you've agreed it was a yellow card offence, and aren't suggesting retrospective yellows, what is the precedent that is bothering you?
Just pointing out that a precedent has been set is all. That OK?
SalfordCityBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 2,515
Can't believe it was reviewed in the first place. Fair enough, if it was us there would have been three days of witchhunt followed by three games of ban, but that doesn't make it right.
sir baconface
Well-Known Member
Just pointing out that a precedent has been set is all. That OK?
Ah so. Sorry to disturb you.