Barnes appeal being considered

[SeagullSongs]

Unlikely, because the referee 'saw', and 'dealt with' the incident.

He dealt with Barnes, but made zero action regarding McCann, so in theory they should be able to give him a ban. Not quite sure how they add up, but made 3 for the tackle and an extra 2 for his reaction?

 

[The Large One]

He dealt with Barnes, but made zero action regarding McCann, so in theory they should be able to give him a ban. Not quite sure how they add up, but made 3 for the tackle and an extra 2 for his reaction?

Erm... not sure that theory stacks up.

He saw the incident and dealt with it. Wrongly, mind.

It's going to take an ALMIGHTY one-eighty from Pawson for Barnes to get out of this, and/or for McCann to get done for it.

 

[binky]

It would if it was preceeded by this one. Barnes is clearly jumping to stop the Burnley player snapping his leg in two. I've watched this almost frame by frame on BBC website and I get angrier and angrier every time I see it. Absolutely no way on earth did Barnes deserve to go for that, whereas the Burnley player should have done. Yes, Barnes landed on the guys leg, but it was ACCIDENTAL and 100% caused by the reckless challenge in the first place. And look where the ref is FFS - how could he not see the challenge from the Burnley player

View attachment 29229

Edit: shit, picture too small

Slomo...

http://81.98.145.74/barnes/barnes.html

The ref clearly watches the 2 footed, off the ground, out of control challenge by McCann, followed by the strangulation assault, then cards the victim.
I think there are excellent grounds for appeal, and if there's any justice, Barnes' Red will be rescinded, McCann will face a retrospective ban, and Pawson will get a rollicking.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Seeing that slo-mo confirms my opinion that Barnes was very hard done by. He is forced to lift both legs from the ground simply to avoid a bad challenge. The ref was and still is a Muppet.

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk

 

[philgull25]

McCann got the ball, Barnes foot landed on McCann's Leg. His reaction for me showed what he thought Barnes had meant to do. Ref based his decision (not unfairly) on those factors. An appeal, especially looking at our previous disciplinary record and the fine from Southampton is unlikely to lead to anything than a fine and increased ban.

Its a harsh red as it was a 50/50 but watch it again. McCann wins the ball. Barnes hesitates for half a second then his foot lands on McCann's knee.

Our disciplinary record compared to our fouls count may seem odd but is it a conspiracy? No. Naivety? Yes.

 

[hola gus]

Seeing that slo-mo confirms my opinion that Barnes was very hard done by. He is forced to lift both legs from the ground simply to avoid a bad challenge. The ref was and still is a Muppet.

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk

Have to agree with you. I 1st saw the incident on sky sat eve and thought it was an instant red card. But the more i watch that slow mo the more i think Barnes has been hard done by. Its telling that CMS and Bridcutt are up in arms straight away but none of the Burnley players are complaining untill there player strangles Barnes!!

 

[the wanderbus]

Any one that still thinks Barnes deserved to go after seeing that slo mo is as big a twat as the ref, McCann dived in with both feet of the ground from about 3 yards away, if that had happened in a sunday morning game he would have got his head kicked in.
perhaps someone could send a link of that video to Howard Webb & Adrian Durham, it might stop them from talking out of their arses.

 

[OSRGull]

only mistake ref made was he should have sent mccan of too.

What about the two footed lunge on El Abd as well?

Not to mention when their player hoofed it out for a corner then he gave a goal kick.

Noone had a very decent penalty shout IMO.

He made some very awful decisions.

 

[Cantona's Flying Dropkick]

Official tweet :-

@OfficialBHAFC will appeal against Ashley Barnes's red card v Burnley. No appeal against Romain Vincelot's red card. #BHAFC

So appeal going ahead.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

The trouble now is that teams coming to the Amex will now go out of their way to antagonise with niggling fouls...especially Southampton Oscar winners supreme...

 

[Deadly Danson]

Excellent slow mo. I have to say without my blue tinted glasses that in my humble opinion both players lunge at EXACTLY the same time. Both deserved red but the assault from McCann on its own warrants a red. Id love to say Barnes is blameless - it would justify the amount of abuse I gave the ref on Saturday - but for whatever reason he definitely lunges dangerously.

 

[Acker79]

I hope not appealing vincelot's will protect us from the frivolous appeal increase. We've looked at both, accept one, but feel we have a right to appeal barnes and are not just wasting time, so they leave it as it is. While I think it was a ridiculous decision, feel Gallagher is defending the ref, that the majority of our fans who agree with the red are people who just don't like barnes, I think the collision is such a messy one that it is too hard for the FA to be able to look at it and say it is unreasonable for a ref to judge it as a red card offence, which I think they feel they need to be able to overturn referee decisions (unless the ref is willing to admit he is wrong and advise they over turn it).

 

[Mr Burns]

I hope not appealing vincelot's will protect us from the frivolous appeal increase. We've looked at both, accept one, but feel we have a right to appeal barnes and are not just wasting time, so they leave it as it is. While I think it was a ridiculous decision, feel Gallagher is defending the ref, that the majority of our fans who agree with the red are people who just don't like barnes, I think the collision is such a messy one that it is too hard for the FA to be able to look at it and say it is unreasonable for a ref to judge it as a red card offence, which I think they feel they need to be able to overturn referee decisions (unless the ref is willing to admit he is wrong and advise they over turn it).

We I dont rate barnes as you know, but I dont dislike him, I wish more players had his heart and determination, or more to the point I wish Barnes had their talent.

But my first reaction when it happened was FFS Barnes what are you doing. And watching the reply, I think the ref was right to send Barnes off, as I think he meant to stamp on the player, even if his first cause of action was to get out of the way, and in my opinion the TV picture shows that. The fact that the Burnley player didnt walk with him, is what has got me baffeled and annoyed. Had Barnes done what 99% of other pros would have done, ie throw his feet up in the air to get out of the way and do a spin, ala Tanno, then I have no doubt it would have 10 vs 10. But the fact he's jumped and came down on the player, even if his first though was to get out of the way, he came down whilst looking where he's landing, I think he's unlucky, but guilty.

 

[rcf0712]

Having just watched that slomo, the immediate reaction of the other 9 players in shot, 3 Albion and 6 Burnley says a lot me. The 3 Albion players all raise both arms in appeal whilst not one Burnley player does anything other than try to play on and pretend nothing untoward has happened......

 

[hans kraay fan club]

We I dont rate barnes as you know, but I dont dislike him, I wish more players had his heart and determination, or more to the point I wish Barnes had their talent.

But my first reaction when it happened was FFS Barnes what are you doing. And watching the reply, I think the ref was right to send Barnes off, as I think he meant to stamp on the player, even if his first cause of action was to get out of the way, and in my opinion the TV picture shows that. The fact that the Burnley player didnt walk with him, is what has got me baffeled and annoyed. Had Barnes done what 99% of other pros would have done, ie throw his feet up in the air to get out of the way and do a spin, ala Tanno, then I have no doubt it would have 10 vs 10. But the fact he's jumped and came down on the player, even if his first though was to get out of the way, he came down whilst looking where he's landing, I think he's unlucky, but guilty.

I understand your point of view.

I'd put it more simply, though:

Only one player in that incident is out of control. Only one goes in with two feet. Neither is Barnes.

He really is incredibly hard done by there. Still not seen th RV one, but from the sounds of it, the two together are beyond sense. Pawson is clearly a grade A twat looking to make a name for himself.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Slomo...

http://81.98.145.74/barnes/barnes.html

The ref clearly watches the 2 footed, off the ground, out of control challenge by McCann, followed by the strangulation assault, then cards the victim.
I think there are excellent grounds for appeal, and if there's any justice, Barnes' Red will be rescinded, McCann will face a retrospective ban, and Pawson will get a rollicking.

The way he jumps into the tackle (McCann) is similar to the tackle Calderon was sent off for against Charlton last season, and he got the ball as well.

 

[withdeanwombat]

There's absolutely no chance of winning an appeal.It's over.Let it go.

 

[ROSM]

The way he jumps into the tackle (McCann) is similar to the tackle Calderon was sent off for against Charlton last season, and he got the ball as well.

I think that's what has got everybody so frustrated about saturday. There is NO consistency in the decision making in the 90 minutes from the same ref let alone across a season from different refs who are all supposedly trained to the same standard and guided by the same rules.

Having now seen the Vincelot incident (thanks Burnley Player) it seems clear to me that the 4th official didnt see it and responded to the reaction of the bench rather than the incident itself. As for the Barnes challenge there is NO way that McCann should have ended that without a RED card given that somone just 6 minutes earlier saw RED for a dig. If he felt Barnes needed to go as well, then that is another matter but in terms of consistency it should have been either 10 v 10 or 10 v 9 after that passage of play.

 

[The Large One]

I think that's what has got everybody so frustrated about saturday. There is NO consistency in the decision making in the 90 minutes from the same ref let alone across a season from different refs who are all supposedly trained to the same standard and guided by the same rules.

Having now seen the Vincelot incident (thanks Burnley Player) it seems clear to me that the 4th official didnt see it and responded to the reaction of the bench rather than the incident itself. As for the Barnes challenge there is NO way that McCann should have ended that without a RED card given that somone just 6 minutes earlier saw RED for a dig. If he felt Barnes needed to go as well, then that is another matter but in terms of consistency it should have been either 10 v 10 or 10 v 9 after that passage of play.

If what you're saying is true (about the 4th official not seeing the Vincelot 'dig'), then he can't be sent off.

Reminiscent of Zidane being wrongly sent off in the 2006 World Cup Final. Or rather, morally the right decision, but technically wrong.

 

[BHAFC_Pandapops]

it's amazing how many people still think barnes was in the wrong...