Rooney to contest suspension

[Brian Fantana]

A ban was defintely excessive.

 

[sydney]

no it wasn't Ronney is a kant.

 

[adrian29uk]

Rooney sounds like the kids my wife has to deal with daily. I am surprised the FA had the balls to do this in the first place. But you wait and see, the two match ban will probably be overturned because it always comes down to money, and because Rooney is a global brand it might affect viewing figures.

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

Rooney sounds like the kids my wife has to deal with daily. I am surprised the FA had the balls to do this in the first place. But you wait and see, the two match ban will probably be overturned because it always comes down to money, and because Rooney is a global brand it might affect viewing figures.

Exactly, the FA can't risk the semi-final lacking any of the big names due to their direct action such as this. Having said all this I bet the ban gets increased

 

[Acker79]

Would he really impact on the semi-final that much when you consider all the other stars that will be playing and that Rooney would likely be there to watch anyway?

 

[sten_super]

I think the appeal is useful, in the sense that it means that the FA should have to firm up whatever rule they've charged him under to cover future breaches. It will (at least in theory) ensure that they make this a enforceable rule in the future.

 

[perth seagull]

The FA should extend the ban for the rest of the season for being a useless, nasty, waste of space git during the last World Cup and continuing this despicable behaviour.

 

[seagulls4ever]

How exactly are you putting it in to context?

Putting it into context as in the punishment (or lack of) which has been handed out to similar and worse offences.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Both of these with the added example of Drogba in the champions league. Alright, that wasn't the FA action, but it is a football precedent involving a game on english soil involving an english team.

Drogba's verbal atack was directed at the referee. Rooney's verbal attack was not directed at anyone specific. Rooney swore, but then most players swear on the pitch and sometimes at the referee. The issue, therefore, is that he swore and it went out live. So where's the precedent for a two-game ban for that?

It's about time the FA proactively drew up a list of offences with mandatory fines and penalties. It seems that half of all red cards awarded are contested and a significant proportion rescinded. This breeds a culture of challenging, which heaps more pressure on the refs and the authorities.

 

[Buzzer]

no it wasn't Ronney is a kant.

Ah, I see. Philosopher that he is, Rooney was formulating a modern twist on the Copernican Revolution.

“Up to now it has been assumed that Man Utd must conform to the standards of the FA; but all attempts to maintain standards a priori through respect for the game have, on this pre-supposition, come to nothing. Hence let us once try whether we do not get further with the problem of ill-discipline by assuming that the FA must conform to Man Utd" (Preface to Critique of Pure Reason B/XVI)

 

[jordanseagull]

For a red card offence? How exactly?

Sorry but that's just an anal viewpoint. Every player on the pitch swears countless times, at the referee countless times (I get it refereeing sunday league) and unless it is strong, abusive language, you can't give a YELLOW. Players can swear as much as they want in games without punishment, even if the law may sometimes be bent. A red card is only if you actually threaten the referee. The FA or anyone else for that matter wouldn't give a monkeys if it hadnt gone out live.

 

[Pavilionaire]

For what it's worth, all 3 football journalists on Sky's Sunday Supplement thought a 2-game ban was excessive, even though all 3 described Rooney as a stupid idiot.

 

[clippedgull]

Decision on Rooneys ban to be relayed to Man U later today but embargoed to public until 10:00am tomorrow, so as not to encroach on preparation for tonights Champions League clash. AP

 

[Acker79]

Drogba's verbal atack was directed at the referee. Rooney's verbal attack was not directed at anyone specific. Rooney swore, but then most players swear on the pitch and sometimes at the referee. The issue, therefore, is that he swore and it went out live. So where's the precedent for a two-game ban for that?

"Drogba and Bosingwa were facing charges of being in breach of the principles of sportsmanship by insulting the referee and by making offensive comments," read a statement on the UEFA website. (I've only dfone a quick google search, but this article quotes the uefa website)
Uefa listed the "offensive comments" as a distinct offence separate from the insulting of the ref, suggesting at least part of the ban was for the swearing into the live TV cameras.

Jose Mourinho made comments about the ref is his post match statement after inter v man utd and faced no action.

Foul language, live TV camera. There's precedent.


And Rooney's may have been at the cameraman (there was something in a martin samuel article yesterday about there being rumours the cameraman had asked Rooney to kiss the camera), or he may have meant it to be directed at his detractors. He hasn't really explained himself, and no one seems to really know what he was thinking. But it was still swearing, which was, at least partially, the reason Drogba got a 6 match ban (last 2 suspended, reduced to 5 last two suspended, I think on appeal)


This was the first big incident after a declaration of more respect for referees. Is Rooney the only one to swear during a match? No, though swearing at a camera is not overly commom. But it was the first blatant swearing since a promised renewed attempt at the respect campaign.

Also, as to whether it's fair for Rooney to be made an example of:

But suppose United were now being closely policed? Suppose somebody at the FA decided they had to take down some of United’s heavyweights as a way of bringing the sport into line. Would that be entirely fair? Perhaps not, but it would be a start.

If the FA wish referees to be treated with more respect, there is no stronger message than the sight of Ferguson spending five games in the stands. When the greatest manager in the English game is no longer untouchable then the rest would be wise to fall into line.

The same goes for Rooney. His charge is flawed because the FA ignored similar behaviour when he was on England duty, but if the best player in the country is banned for swearing into a television camera, others similarly motivated will have to think twice.

Would it happen to a player at Burton Albion? No, because a player at Burton would not be going live to the nation at lunchtime on Saturday.

Manchester United cannot enjoy all the benefits of being part of the elite — the financial rewards, the lucrative global exposure which adds hugely to turnover — without acknowledging that certain responsibilities are part of this deal.

There are plenty of clubs at which Rooney will never be troubled by pitch-side TV cameras, but they tend not to offer salaries of £200,000 a week or play Champions League quarter-final ties against Chelsea.
(Read more: Martin Samuel: 'We're Manchester United, we do what we want' (... well, not any more you don't!) | Mail Online)

 

[sydney]

Ah, I see. Philosopher that he is, Rooney was formulating a modern twist on the Copernican Revolution.

“Up to now it has been assumed that Man Utd must conform to the standards of the FA; but all attempts to maintain standards a priori through respect for the game have, on this pre-supposition, come to nothing. Hence let us once try whether we do not get further with the problem of ill-discipline by assuming that the FA must conform to Man Utd" (Preface to Critique of Pure Reason B/XVI)

philosipher , philanthropist , philharmonic f***ing orchestra, the guy is a SCROTE , end of....

 

[Vatican Citys No.2 Keeper]

FA have upheld the ban

BBC Sport - Wayne Rooney banned for Man Utd's FA Cup semi-final

 

[Racek]

got what he deserved.

 

[Tooting Gull]

That is absolutely ridiculous on so many levels. What Rooney needs is professional help for his anger issues, and you have to blame Manchester United for not taking better care of their prize asset.

What he did was wrong, but by immediately apologising that has to mitigate the offence. Most of the time radio and TV fade out swearing picked up from players. So, for consistency, TV should now broadcast every single swearword they pick up (how is that better for kids?) and ban all those players. That's probably ten players every televised match.

He may be a mindless thug as well as a great player, but Rooney has been totally shafted on this one. What if Glenn Murray went up to a camera after scoring the winner against Southampton this month and said 'F***ing have that, Adkins'. Would he deserve a ban (I'm tempted to say or a medal)? It's a passionate game, I think an apology and a fine is enough. I don't really buy all this footballers as role models stuff anyway, if you're a parent, YOU'RE the role model. It's not Wayne Rooney's job to raise your child (thank Christ).

This is unlikely to do anything to help the FA's spiky relationship with United, and they are petty-minded enough to respond. My prediction: All FA staff banned from receiving tickets to Old Trafford.

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

Well that proved me wrong. Very surprised

 

[Chesney Christ]

Hope they throw the book at him. Rooney is vermin. An angry little tosser with a permanent chip on his shoulder. He's a nasty little wretch, and hopefully now that the FA have FINALLY taken a stand against him, we will see him sent off every time he calls the ref to "f*** off you f***ing cheating c*nt", as he does EVERY WEEK. So, he'll be permanently banned. Fantastic.

One question that no one seems to have asked (or answered) in amongst all this. Why the f*** was someone who had just scored a hat-trick so angry?