Many laws are fairly ambiguous

So comes down to what is expected

If players were always getting away with petulant kicks, then that would be the expected outcome

Posted By: SCC 28 on March 8th 2024 at 09:58:31

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.