Whelan escapes FA action.

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

I think the rule should be changed anyway.

As LoveCity rightly pointed out; if Whelan was banned for three games it would not benefit us in any way whatsoever, even though he made the offence against us.

Why not make it so that any retrospective ban results in the particular player missing future games versus the team against which he committed the offence?

It's about punishing a player, not about benefiting the opposing team.
The punishment is to make the player think twice about doing it again or at least save someone else getting a serious injury.

Your idea also falls flat on its face - imagine a player on the verge of moving abroad or playing with a team about to be relegated and he knows he wont be back in the Premier League again......

 

[edgecroft]

What if he moves to the team he committed the foul against? Would that mean that he wouldn't be allowed to play with himself?

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

What if he moves to the team he committed the foul against? Would that mean that he wouldn't be allowed to play with himself?

have to sit out training for 3 days...

 

[Cellarite]

What if he moves to the team he committed the foul against? Would that mean that he wouldn't be allowed to play with himself?

Jesus Christ, if I was facing those sanctions I'd never make another tackle.

 

[MCFC BOB]

I think the rule should be changed anyway.

As LoveCity rightly pointed out; if Whelan was banned for three games it would not benefit us in any way whatsoever, even though he made the offence against us.

Why not make it so that any retrospective ban results in the particular player missing future games versus the team against which he committed the offence?

It's about punishing a player, not about benefiting the opposing team.
The punishment is to make the player think twice about doing it again or at least save someone else getting a serious injury.

Your idea also falls flat on its face - imagine a player on the verge of moving abroad or playing with a team about to be relegated and he knows he wont be back in the Premier League again......

I'll reply when I'm back on my laptop. :)

 

[M18CTID]

Hold on a sec - the FA say they can only take action if it's an off the ball incident but I'm sure I remember Vieira getting a retrospective ban for raking his studs down a Stoke player's leg a few seasons back when going in for a tackle. Funnily enough, that player was Glenn Whelan and Pulis made a right fucking song and dance about it afterwards, demanding that retrospective action be taken.

 

[NZBlue]

I think you can safely call it an "on the ball" incident, in more ways than one


get in there Paddy!

 

[moomba]

How about Adebayor stepping on Van Persies sensitive head. Clattenberg even waved play on from memory.

Make it up as they go along.

 

[FantasyIreland]

Alan Brazil suggested rescinding Kompanys card has now opened the floodgates to this type of challenge.....

Fucking nob.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

i really don't understand the rule that is stated in that article. it just doesn't make sense. everyone knows that incidents that were unpunished can be challenged retrospectively, so why not in this case?

i really don't know and i really don't care

Neither do the FArce. They have a look at the table, check with BaconFace and Gill and then fuck the rule - we're doing this - Red shirts get off and blue shirts don't!