Sent off for tackling pitch invader

[Mr Burns]

It comes under the 'violent conduct law' not because the action was particularly violent, but because it is "excessive force".

He ran at him and pretty much threw him to the ground with an arm drag take down. I think the pitch invader had it coming to him and I would love to see such a thing given a pass from the laws, but it was "excessive force" in that it was more than was necessary. Grab him, restrain him, and the ref would have taken no action, run at the guy and throw/drag him to the ground with the force that the momentum of running at him gave you, when there are other people on the field who are employed to stop him, and it is "excessive".

Err. I dont think that would stand up in court. What you are saying is basically wait for him to get close enough and then grab him? He was running towards people then darting off, so it would be near impossbile to grab him without running at him and dragging him down.

I'm sure Edna can back this up, but if the law are trying to catch someone, I've never seen them grab someones shoulder and that person stands still. They drag them down to the ground. Its the only safe way of doing it. What you are saying is every time police officer pulls someone to the ground to make an arrest, thats excessive force? If the pratt stood still and the player dragged him down, you might have a point, abiet a small one, but in this case I fail to see what he done wrong. Maybe they should have waited 20 minutes and wait for the pratt to get tried or bored.....??

I cannot believe you are backing the ref on this one. The bloke seems a complete prick who went over the top. Listening to the crowd, it could have kicked off in there as well because of the refs actions.

 

[Badger]

I love the ref's feeble attempts at getting the players to go away by waving both his arms in the air.

It's a prime example of a ref putting the strict rules of the game ahead of common sense. I don't think a single person in the crowd or on the pitch would have complained if he had taken no action against the player.

 

[Tim Over Whelmed]

We reap what we sow, which is why in months or years to come we'll all complain about why it took the stewards 10 minutes to catch a streaker and why did the players stand idly by and look. BTW got a paper cut opening my gas bill, who should I sue, the gas company, the envelope manufacturer, the postman or god?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Dorchester were down to 8 by the end, and almost had another sent off at the final whistle for throwing the ball at the ref. Vickers is a bit of a tw*t and was walking a thin line even before that incident, so I think the ref probably had enough of him as it was. Not justifying it, but according to friends there he could have been sent off before that incident anyway.

 

[Acker79]

Err. I dont think that would stand up in court. What you are saying is basically wait for him to get close enough and then grab him? He was running towards people then darting off, so it would be near impossbile to grab him without running at him and dragging him down.

I'm sure Edna can back this up, but if the law are trying to catch someone, I've never seen them grab someones shoulder and that person stands still. They drag them down to the ground. Its the only safe way of doing it. What you are saying is every time police officer pulls someone to the ground to make an arrest, thats excessive force? If the pratt stood still and the player dragged him down, you might have a point, abiet a small one, but in this case I fail to see what he done wrong. Maybe they should have waited 20 minutes and wait for the pratt to get tried or bored.....??

I cannot believe you are backing the ref on this one. The bloke seems a complete prick who went over the top. Listening to the crowd, it could have kicked off in there as well because of the refs actions.

I'm backing the ref because he applied the law. The player had no business chasing the pitch invader down, there were stewards doing so, therefore any action could be considered unnecessary, which can therefore be interpreted as excessive.

Police are, I believe, trained to restrain people safely and effectively, football players generally are not. The player dragged the invader to the pitch not by design (as police do) but because he was just chasing and grabbing the invader and the momentum forced them both to ground. It becomes excessive force because of the momentum the player had, combined with the fact he had no reason to be acting at all.

If he had done such a move to any player it would be a red card, and the only people defending it would be those that claim the FA and fifa are trying to sanitise the game or make it a non-contact sport etc.

As for what he should have done, he should have done what the other 21 players on the pitch did: they were perfectly happy to wait for the stewards to do their job.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with the player doing what he did myself, and think that sort of action should be explicitly permitted in the laws of the game, but it currently is not, and the ref was perfectly correct in applying the law as it is. Maybe the ref bounced around a bit, and was a little flamboyant in his mannerisms (to be honest I wasn't focusing on his mannerisms), but that doesn't mean his decision wasn't in keeping with the laws of the game.

I don't think a single person in the crowd or on the pitch would have complained if he had taken no action against the player.

I don't either, but the FA may have if the pitch invader decided to sue for any injuries real, exaggerated or imagined. A red card for the player shows they are actively discouraging the actions, punishing the player for what he did and thus removing them from the equation.

 

[garethlewes]

Err. I dont think that would stand up in court. What you are saying is basically wait for him to get close enough and then grab him? He was running towards people then darting off, so it would be near impossbile to grab him without running at him and dragging him down.

I'm sure Edna can back this up, but if the law are trying to catch someone, I've never seen them grab someones shoulder and that person stands still. They drag them down to the ground. Its the only safe way of doing it. What you are saying is every time police officer pulls someone to the ground to make an arrest, thats excessive force? If the pratt stood still and the player dragged him down, you might have a point, abiet a small one, but in this case I fail to see what he done wrong. Maybe they should have waited 20 minutes and wait for the pratt to get tried or bored.....??

I cannot believe you are backing the ref on this one. The bloke seems a complete prick who went over the top. Listening to the crowd, it could have kicked off in there as well because of the refs actions.

Are you mentally retarded, there has already been someone who has posted the laws of the game up therefore why are you continuing to argue that its not right. Also you seem to think that the person who you are replying to with this quote is talking about the criminal law, as if you didn't know he was talking about the laws of the game.

It know it did seem like a ridiculous decision by the referee, but had he not sent the player off he would have been in trouble, because crazy as it seems, the player was sent off for violent conduct, the fact it was against the streaker is immaterial.

 

[AIT76]

Our stewards came onto the pitch but are middle aged and had a bit of trouble getting him...

 

[Mr Burns]

Are you mentally retarded, there has already been someone who has posted the laws of the game up therefore why are you continuing to argue that its not right. Also you seem to think that the person who you are replying to with this quote is talking about the criminal law, as if you didn't know he was talking about the laws of the game.

It know it did seem like a ridiculous decision by the referee, but had he not sent the player off he would have been in trouble, because crazy as it seems, the player was sent off for violent conduct, the fact it was against the streaker is immaterial.

Am I mentally retarded? Are you some sort of cun t?

 

[Mr Burns]

You'd ague that black was white.

After last month when a player was knocked out by a pitch invader, I say anyone who invades the pitch gets everything they deserve and more. What happens if everyone stood around and waited for the stewards to catch him, stewards who by the looks of them couldn't catch a cold, and he went and hit a player like last months cup game? If you watch the video of that, that punch came out of nowhere, so whos to say he wasn't going to do the same?

What I would love to see, is that refs next game, someone invades the pitch runs around for 30 seconds, and then hits the ref, and every single player stands there and watches while the stewards fall over themseleves trying to catch him. "Sorry ref, couldn't help out, as I'd have been given a red card".

The referee was a prick. You speak of laws of the game. Bollocks to that. Common sense mate. Something it seems you and this ref lack.

I'll quote you a law "using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures" is a red card.
"dissent by word or action" is a yellow card. Both quotes straight from the handbook.

Now go and watch any game on the telebox, and you tell me referees apply these laws?

They don't. In extreme cases they do, but very rarely. If the player in this game we are talking about, just done that out of the blue to another player or fan, then couldn't agree with you more. The fact he done it to someone who in recent past history could have been a danger, in my view he should have got a pat on the back, not a red card for the idiot of a referee.

So use some common sense. Its completey free, although seemingly not available to everyone.

 

[Mr Burns]

Our stewards came onto the pitch but are middle aged and had a bit of trouble getting him...

Sort of pisses on the other arguments if this is the case.

The FA have refused to comment on the matter because of the potential for an appeal but a source within the FA told The News the sending off was likely to be rescinded as soon as possible.

If thats the case, it shows that the FA agrees with what I have been saying, because for them to overrule a referee like that is as common as rocking horse shit. Time will tell, but I'd be amazed it that quote isn't true.

 

[chops]

What would the ref have made of this...
Springbok fan attacks referee during 2002 Tri Nations match

 

[Mr Burns]

What would the ref have made of this...
Springbok fan attacks referee during 2002 Tri Nations match

Well by Acker's and that twat for Lewes argument, maybe the players should have stepped back and let them get on with it, as I doubt there a law in the handbook that tells you what is okay to do in this situation, and by their reasonings rules are rules and must be applied.

 

[Brovion]

I'm backing the ref because he applied the law. The player had no business chasing the pitch invader down, there were stewards doing so, therefore any action could be considered unnecessary, which can therefore be interpreted as excessive.

....

But the stewards weren't doing it were they? He looked quite a young man and was running around quite nimbly whilst they wheezily tried to catch him. God knows how long it would have gone on for if the player hadn't intervened and tried to make what was basically a Citizen's Arrest.

It's the equivalent of watching a mugger rob somebody and not trying to stop them because you have 'no business' in enforcing the law. Hopefully justice will be done and the red card will be rescinded.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

This is how we do it over here!

The guy who got the streaker was just a runner (bloke who takes messages to players from coach)

 

[Acker79]

You'd ague that black was white.

After last month when a player was knocked out by a pitch invader, I say anyone who invades the pitch gets everything they deserve and more. What happens if everyone stood around and waited for the stewards to catch him, stewards who by the looks of them couldn't catch a cold, and he went and hit a player like last months cup game? If you watch the video of that, that punch came out of nowhere, so whos to say he wasn't going to do the same?

What I would love to see, is that refs next game, someone invades the pitch runs around for 30 seconds, and then hits the ref, and every single player stands there and watches while the stewards fall over themseleves trying to catch him. "Sorry ref, couldn't help out, as I'd have been given a red card".

The referee was a prick. You speak of laws of the game. Bollocks to that. Common sense mate. Something it seems you and this ref lack.

I'll quote you a law "using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures" is a red card.
"dissent by word or action" is a yellow card. Both quotes straight from the handbook.

Now go and watch any game on the telebox, and you tell me referees apply these laws?

They don't. In extreme cases they do, but very rarely. If the player in this game we are talking about, just done that out of the blue to another player or fan, then couldn't agree with you more. The fact he done it to someone who in recent past history could have been a danger, in my view he should have got a pat on the back, not a red card for the idiot of a referee.

So use some common sense. Its completey free, although seemingly not available to everyone.

No, but I would also see them apply lots of other laws. Are you suggesting they are all pricks because they apply the offside law? The deliberate handling law? Make sure there's only 11 players in each team? Yes, there are laws that refs ignore, but that doesn't mean they are wrong when they apply other laws correctly.

Common sense dictates you can't have common sense and consistency in football, even though people call for both.

Common sense could also dictate you see he's an idiot running around for a laugh. The guy in the FA cup incident didn't run past the guy he hit a couple of times before he hit him, he ran on the pitch, made his way toward the player he had a personal grudge with, he hit him on first passing. He didn't run round both entire teams both times like a fool, nor was he running around in a borat thong, another indication this person was being silly, not malicious.

I wouldn't have complained if the ref hadn't sent him off, and have no issue with the FA rescinding the card. But it's hardly fair to criticise him for applying the law, is it?

But the stewards weren't doing it were they? He looked quite a young man and was running around quite nimbly whilst they wheezily tried to catch him. God knows how long it would have gone on for if the player hadn't intervened and tried to make what was basically a Citizen's Arrest.

It's the equivalent of watching a mugger rob somebody and not trying to stop them because you have 'no business' in enforcing the law. Hopefully justice will be done and the red card will be rescinded.

That's a deliberately evocative, and perhaps not so deliberately inaccurate comparison. A mugger has committed a personal crime, is a clear threat to actual people. What this person did is akin to running on the lawn where there are signs saying "keep off the grass", not really a fair comparison, is it.

 

[Mr Burns]

No, but I would also see them apply lots of other laws. Are you suggesting they are all pricks because they apply the offside law? The deliberate handling law? Make sure there's only 11 players in each team? Yes, there are laws that refs ignore, but that doesn't mean they are wrong when they apply other laws correctly.

Common sense could also dictate you see he's an idiot running around for a laugh. The guy in the FA cup incident didn't run past the guy he hit a couple of times before he hit him, he ran on the pitch, made his way toward the player he had a personal grudge with, he hit him on first passing. He didn't run round both entire teams both times like a fool, nor was he running around in a borat thong, another indication this person was being silly, not malicious.

But surely the fact that they dont apply all other laws to the letter, would have suggested he didnt need to send him off. Its not as if this happens every day, whereas you have to apply the offside law strictly, otherwise whats the point of it. This law is arguable whether it even applied, so I would say the ref is being an idiot for what he done. I would bet a pound to a pinch of shit, at least half the players swore at him during his moment of madness, if you've ever been in a position like that you will know thats a given, but he didn't brand a load of yellow or red cards.. or did he? Are you telling me he booked or sent off every player who swore during the course of the game like the laws of the game require him too?

And even judging by recent events, how can you even begin to try and judge the invaders intentions. Its 99% certain he was just being a pratt, but why take the risk?

I do wonder if/when you think it becomes acceptable to act outside the laws of the game. So what if the ref was hit like you see in other clips on this thread, should the players help out, should they man handle the offender to the ground? Or just stand by and wait for the proper people to arrive on the scene? What law of the game gives them the right to do that, or would you then like them to use their common sense. Where do you draw the line, and where is this line written down in the laws of the game?

The fact the FA seems to be considering quashing the red card doesn't help your argument much. As I said above, the FA going against refs and doing this type of thing does not happen very if ever. But then if the powers that be says its okay and reserve the red card, will you change your opinion?

 

[Mr Burns]

But the stewards weren't doing it were they? He looked quite a young man and was running around quite nimbly whilst they wheezily tried to catch him. God knows how long it would have gone on for if the player hadn't intervened and tried to make what was basically a Citizen's Arrest.

It's the equivalent of watching a mugger rob somebody and not trying to stop them because you have 'no business' in enforcing the law. Hopefully justice will be done and the red card will be rescinded.

But by Ackers reasoning, the laws of the game would overrule making a citizens arrest and the laws of the land.

Believe me, there's many in the FA who think like that as well!!!

 

[Mr Burns]

That's a deliberately evocative, and perhaps not so deliberately inaccurate comparison. A mugger has committed a personal crime, is a clear threat to actual people. What this person did is akin to running on the lawn where there are signs saying "keep off the grass", not really a fair comparison, is it.

No. Is it not an offense for a fan to run on the pitch? Ever been to a football ground? Or maybe that law should not be applied here, because he was just having fun. For someone who thinks the ref was right, you seem to like to pick and choose what laws should apply where!

 

[Brovion]

That's a deliberately evocative, and perhaps not so deliberately inaccurate comparison. A mugger has committed a personal crime, is a clear threat to actual people. What this person did is akin to running on the lawn where there are signs saying "keep off the grass", not really a fair comparison, is it.

Well that's another debate. The point is there are two issues at stake here. One is a purely football offence where I agree the ref acted within the laws of the game. He may indeed be an anally-retentive wanker far more interested in a strict intrepretation of the very letter of the law and without an ounce of common-sense in his pea-brained, one-track mind - but it could be argued that he WAS within his rights. The other issue was that the pitch invader had broken one of the many bylaws surrounding professional football in this country and the player, showing commendable public spirit, had helped the stewards to enforce the Regulations. He didn't do it straight away, but when it became obvious that the stewards couldn't catch him, and indeed were being made to look foolish, he stepped in to help.

I would have hoped that the aid he gave to the struggling stewards may have persuaded the referee NOT to be such a pedantic martinet, but apparently not. Hopefully the card will be rescinded and the ref told not to be such a pratt in future.

 

[Wilko]

A bit harsh.

Not like he went all Andreas Dahl on the guy.

That is a pretty impressive ballbag. What?