I for one am in agreement that any player that feigns an injury in the interest of obtaining an advantage via disciplinary action should be reviewed.
Presumably, these unseen incidents will only be reviewed by the matches that are filmed. With approximately 22 cameras at every live premier TV game, the review panel have a huge help with their decision making. Lower down the footballing league, the amount of recorded coverage is reduced and the more difficult it will be to come to a conclusion. In the Sutton/Kabba incident, the film footage to me was inconclusive to obtain what factually happened, however, there seemed enough circumstantial evidence to suggest what did. I wonder on what basis the decision is made?
Like others have said, I think it is a good rule, just unlucky the TV cameras have dished Welling some bad luck again.
If the FA are doing this to Kabba, what should their stance be for people like Sterling who 100% dived to get the penalty again Switzerland? Nothing I would imagine.
I also think Sutton clearly raised his elbow and aimed it in Kabba's direction. My understanding of the football rules says that's a straight red whether he connects or not.
I also think Sutton clearly raised his elbow and aimed it in Kabba's direction. My understanding of the football rules says that's a straight red whether he connects or not.
That was my understanding too. It looks like I need to read up on the laws as they must have changed.
I'd love to know what our defence was. Once they overturn the red for Sutton, the new rules make it fairly clear what the consequences will be.
That said, three games seems very harsh. Deliberately punching someone carries the same ban, and when you let someone off doing cocaine this week you can't really then ban a part-time footballer for three games for a little exaggeration and expect people not to query it.
Did we really think that the FA would drop the charge against Sahr. They couldn't wait to ban and fine him. Its only little old Welling. What gets me is how do they know he was trying to get the player sent off? Have they read Sahr's mind 6 days after the incident? He went down after an elbow was swung at him contact or no contact. They could equally assume that Sutton intended to injure Sahr. I hope the club will be watching very carefully to see if the treatment we've received is dished out to other clubs under the same circumstances. The FA have branded our club again. I await to see how referee's treat us in the coming weeks. Their minds are being made up for them by the FA.
-- Edited by Riverstown on Friday 11th of September 2015 11:16:36 PM
These decisions are made by three old men in suits in 48 hours ... imagine a criminal charge going to court like that. Would be farcical .. as this is becoming.
Is this new 'ruling' covers any incidents which a player who dives in the area and wins a penalty though cheating and gets the defender sent off in the process. If not, it should be!
-- Edited by Broken Wing on Friday 11th of September 2015 10:29:41 PM
I was just having another look at Tom's WingsTV hightlights of the Tranmere game. For those of you who can have a look at the 2.50 min mark. Tranmere put a freekick in towards our penalty area. The ref awards them another freekick for a very dubious foul. What was their player doing going to ground holding his face? Surely he wasn't attempting to influence the ref was he? Tranmere players don't do that. Do they?
All footage proved inconclusive. So how they could uphold the charge and suspend Kabba is just farcical. Im amazed.
It is farcical yes, am I amazed? No. Predicable really. As annoying as it is for Welling, feigning injury does need stamping out for the good of the game, just a shame the first case is versus a Welling player. Disappointing that this rule has been brought in over the summer, and so many other issues haven't been addressed, like diving, time wasting, etc. If they want to clear up the game from gamesmanship then go the whole hog and stamp everything out in one fail swoop. Remember the advance the free-kick ten yards rule from a few years back? why did that disappear, would have worked if refs had the backing and the balls to use it properly.
Three games seems very, very harsh as well. There are several instances of people being extremely aggressive, violent, cheating, playacting and all sorts, and sometimes then ban is just one game.
I hope the FA have a look at the incident with Torquays Hurst and Ben Jefford, Jeffo pushed Hurst in the chest Hurst takes two steps back and performs a dive holding his face said he'd received a right hander from Anthony Joshua. Jefford gets booked but nothing for Hurst. If Kabba gets a 3 match ban then surely Hurst must get he same.
__________________
All postings lubricated by The Door Hinge Ale House 11 Welling High Street
Unless they receive video evidence then it will be down to the officials to report what they saw. Like you DavyK I saw what happened. The referee consulted with the fourth official who was just feet away, and from that, Ben was shown a yellow card. In my opinion, if he saw an act that required a card then he must have seen what their no.2 had done as well. The fourth official was very weak with dealing with their manager throughout the game, and weak on saying to the ref what he should have been witnessed to. Can't see anything coming from it I'm afraid.
The rules are that action against a player for feigning injury can only be taken if it leads to a player being sent off. If the club then appeal the red card and are successful, the FA will then look into whether the player has feigned injury. So even if we sent footage in of the incident from Saturday's game, it wouldn't get anywhere.
__________________
Welling United FC. Banging on the walls of Woking dressing rooms since 1963..
And you can't appeal yellow cards, if Jeffo had been booked earlier and this incident resulted in a second yellow = Red there is no appeal process, this needs to be changed
__________________
All postings lubricated by The Door Hinge Ale House 11 Welling High Street