Yes, and excessive force is defined too:

“Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent. • A player who uses excessive force must be sent off

It’s an “and” test. So even if you took the view that any kick is excessive force, it would still need to result in a danger of injuring the opponent. By Howson’s own admission in his radio interview, the contact was minimal. Therefore it cannot be excessive force. It’s not as if he made a big lunge at him and only clipped, which could still be a red, Howson felt the full force of whatever force there was, and was never in danger of being injured.

Case closed.

Posted By: SimonOTBC on March 8th 2024 at 09:38:17

Message Thread

I think Sainz wins his appeal today (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 08:11:59
- Let me know if I have to do anything (n/m) (NCFC) - Augustus Pablo, Mar 8, 12:24:29
- You can read previous decisions on the FAs website (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 11:58:36
  - Quite analogeous albeit it was contact during a challenge not an alleged kick out (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Mar 8, 12:31:32
  - It’s previous overturns like this (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 12:03:26
- I am sure he’ll win the appeal. (NCFC) - Fenwood Lad, Mar 8, 09:55:31
- Dead to me, JH (NCFC) - Nelsons final flanel, Mar 8, 09:41:17
  - Hero to zero and I hope the lego-headed c88t is reading this (n/m) (NCFC) - MonkeyPuzzle, Mar 8, 10:52:23
    - Almost certainly is (NCFC) - Nelsons final flanel, Mar 8, 11:01:28
  - Same as a dive for a pen, players are always gonna look for it. (n/m) (NCFC) - Lentil Weaver, Mar 8, 09:47:34
  - Perfectly fine (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 09:43:15
    - Good to see Kenny pointing out to his face that he was cheating (n/m) (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 10:25:29
- I am not sure he will. I think he should but they will want to protect their boy Madley. (n/m) (NCFC) - colincanary, Mar 8, 09:01:45
- Admitting it was a naughty challenge from him as well. (n/m) (NCFC) - JD3, Mar 8, 08:58:11
- "contacts contact" (NCFC) - Ken Dodds Dads Dog, Mar 8, 08:49:41
  - I hate that line, so often trotted out by players and pundits (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Mar 8, 09:26:33
  - *' (n/m) (NCFC) - Ken Dodds Dads Dog, Mar 8, 08:50:44
- Basically confirming that most players are cheats (n/m) (NCFC) - jamesward, Mar 8, 08:47:15
  - I sent a couple of views of it to former Prem Ref I know.. His response.... (NCFC) - Azteca, Mar 8, 11:47:36
  - Yeah. What Howson did is no different to a player going down for a penno after minimal con (n/m) (NCFC) - Trent_Canary, Mar 8, 08:49:31
    - *contact (n/m) (NCFC) - Trent_Canary, Mar 8, 08:49:44
- What is the definition of violent conduct? (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 08:24:14
  - Not what Sainz did! (n/m) (NCFC) - Trent_Canary, Mar 8, 08:39:11
  - Here: (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 08:32:51
    - Any kick out is an attempt at excessive force tbf (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 08:44:49
      - I don’t think so (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 09:03:57
      - No its not. But he didn't kick out anyway (NCFC) - Jim, Mar 8, 08:48:07
        
        yes it is ... (NCFC) - ghostof barry butler, Mar 8, 09:05:50
        
        Nope. Any kick out is a foul. Violent conduct requires excessive force or brutality (NCFC) - Jim, Mar 8, 09:28:02
        
        If a player pushes another gently in the chest they are not sent off (NCFC) - Jim, Mar 8, 09:30:43
        
        Interesting ref talk here (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 09:39:16
        
        Interesting how few refs know the rules based on that (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 09:51:51
        
        Many laws are fairly ambiguous (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 09:58:31
        
        Yes, and also I think it’s based on common practice more than the letter of the law (n/m) (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 10:19:52
        
        VMT (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 10:20:51
        
        Yes, and excessive force is defined too: (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 09:38:17
        
        As it was totally unnecessary (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 09:42:56
        
        He wasn't in danger of injuring Howson (NCFC) - jamesward, Mar 8, 09:54:34
        
        Doesn’t take much with studs tbf (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 10:08:48
        
        I suppose if you're counting a slight graze or reddening of the skin (NCFC) - jamesward, Mar 8, 10:14:55
        
        I think the main problem is that the presumption of the panel is that the ref was correct (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 10:24:36
        
        If that counts as being in danger of injuring Howson, so does every single tackle (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 09:48:50
        
        Tackles are a necessary part of the game though (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 09:52:15
        
        Yes there is, but the language used is the same (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 10:21:28
        
        Can’t injure someone by pushing them (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 09:33:43
        
        Yep (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 09:22:42
        
        Could certainly be interpreted that way. Anything more than no force is excessive!! (n/m) (NCFC) - JD3, Mar 8, 08:57:15
    - I think he should win the appeal. Different rules vs if it was howson’s face (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 08:33:25
  - All depends on interpretation I think (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 08:25:47
- BEEP BEEP BEEP (NCFC) - norwaay, Mar 8, 08:13:28
  - .... (NCFC) - Trent_Canary, Mar 8, 08:38:31
  - ... (NCFC) - Chris Peacock, Mar 8, 08:25:50
  - However the appeal goes (NCFC) - SCC 28, Mar 8, 08:24:00
  - 😂😂😂 (n/m) (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Mar 8, 08:23:30

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.