[Football] Baily Wright (Bristol City) found guilty of Simulation

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

How long to players keep doing this if they realise it gets them nothing? Makes them look stupid on TV and they get nothing more. Answer - they don't.

So you're actually confirming that giving this guy the red card for falling down and holding his face is the right thing because it acts as a deterrent to other players who are thinking of doing it? It's made Baily Wright look stupid and he misses some games.

I agree.

 

[Mayonaise]

Quite clear that the football authorities don't know what they doing

 

[Chinman3000]

So you're actually confirming that giving this guy the red card for falling down and holding his face is the right thing because it acts as a deterrent to other players who are thinking of doing it? It's made Baily Wright look stupid and he misses some games.

I agree.

The ref didn't see him struck in the face (as it didn't happen) and assumed he was because of his reaction. This should be the REF's fault, as he should be giving what he see not what he assumes.

 

[Bodian]

However, looking at the enlarged slowed down version, it does look as though he may have actually hid the side of his head/face on the ground when he fell backwards - and maybe his initial reaction was to hold his face? Would be interesting to see what his face looked like when he got up. Also, the worst fall is backwards like this - likely to do a lot more damage than falling forwards - your arms and hands are all in the wrong place. Thinking back to Tomer's ban, he got three games for a possible accidental event - whereas the guy who quite clearly pushed the bloke off balance gets his red rescinded and no ban at all? Doesn't really add up.

 

[Da Man Clay]

Looks a good decision. About time this utter nonsense of theatrics from incidents like this stopped. If this is the step towards that then great.

 

[Weststander]

By the looks of it, the slower replay suggests it was a shove to the chest but he went down holding his head. I reckon the FA got it right.

This 100%. The slow motion shows exactly what happened. They came together, with Kamara shoving the chest of Bailey more forcefully than the Bailey barge.

Bailey immediately holds his unharmed head, in agony for some time. It's a wonder he was able to meet the FA; I would have thought that he'd be in intensive care on life support.

Bailey cheated. Well done to the FA for the new law and applying it.

 

[Weststander]

However, looking at the enlarged slowed down version, it does look as though he may have actually hid the side of his head/face on the ground when he fell backwards - and maybe his initial reaction was to hold his face? Would be interesting to see what his face looked like when he got up. Also, the worst fall is backwards like this - likely to do a lot more damage than falling forwards - your arms and hands are all in the wrong place. Thinking back to Tomer's ban, he got three games for a possible accidental event - whereas the guy who quite clearly pushed the bloke off balance gets his red rescinded and no ban at all? Doesn't really add up.

The cheat's hand was moving to his face, before he landed.

 

[wallyback]

The ref didn't see him struck in the face (as it didn't happen) and assumed he was because of his reaction. This should be the REF's fault, as he should be giving what he see not what he assumes.

It certainly looks like he caught him in the face with his hand as it swung through.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

I was under the impression that there was an FA directive a few seasons ago which made it clear that using hands to push an opponent would be a yellow but if the use of hands was above the neck it would be a red card.

On this basis the review of the incident is spot on. The red card is rescinded as the push was to the chest and not the face and therefore on the day should have been a yellow.
The Bristol city player falls to the ground but decides to hold his face. Assuming that the libesman or ref saw the coming together but were uncertain where the hands made contact then the holding of the face who influence them to conclude it was a red card offence.
The lengthy tirade on the Bristol City website is misguided as it does not address why their player was holding his face.
The FA have correctly applied their rules.

Did you miss this bit?

Our legal team prepared a detailed response with Bailey, along with video evidence that clearly shows Aboubakar Kamara charging into Bailey with his hands raised in which the club and Bailey maintained that there was no simulation by the player. The force of the contact caused Bailey to lose balance and fall to the ground, landing awkwardly on his neck and back. In no way did Bailey exaggerate his reaction and neither did he approach or complain to the referee about Kamara, asking for the Fulham player to be dismissed.

Also - did you watch the slow mo part where it was zoomed in on a large-ish screen?
You would see that the Bristol player falling does not put his hands to his face (or around that area) until he has already hit the ground, it was not immediate (some replies sound like he did it straight away as contact was first made)

Also the other player striking him's hands do move upwards after contacting his chest as a part of the motion so it could have possibly have made contact higher up, including the chance it could have made contact with with his face too


I think the decision is extremely harsh and incorrect, there are far more blatant examples of simulation which the FA could have looked at and taken retrospective action over and use as a demonstration of their willingness to enforce the new rule, examples which were far more clear cut cases of simulation than this incident but they don't. Maybe this one was only examined because of the red card and there could have been an appeal (if the previous poster is correct, and a shove to the chest is only a yellow, it could be the only reason why it was examined)

There have been plenty of innocuous challenges that have left a player injured, sometimes serious and out for several weeks / months and are usually from the way they land or if they caught their studs, etc... Would the FA ban them too for simulation because those challenges wouldn't look like enough to justify the reaction (if this is the standard to which they judge, then the answer would be yes, they would be banned)

 

[GT49er]

Looks a good decision. About time this utter nonsense of theatrics from incidents like this stopped. If this is the step towards that then great.

Agree with this - to an extent. It'll be no good at all unless it gets applied to big names at big clubs.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

By the looks of it, the slower replay suggests it was a shove to the chest but he went down holding his head. I reckon the FA got it right.

Mmmm.... doesn't look like he's holding his head to me, even though big lad looks like he may have caught bloke's face with his arm. The shove was certainly a shove.

 

[StonehamPark]

Bad decision by the panel.

Incident happened outside of play.
Excessive force.
Shoved over to the lower neck or upper chest.
Correct red for the aggressor.
Incorrect decision to ban the BC player for 'simulation', as there was none.

 

[Weststander]

Bad decision by the panel.

Incident happened outside of play.
Excessive force.
Shoved over to the lower neck or upper chest.
Correct red for the aggressor.
Incorrect decision to ban the BC player for 'simulation', as there was none.

An aggressive shove on the chest, was turned into being poll axed, on the floor with awful skull pain.

Feigning injury to deceive an official, leading to a penalty or dismissal, is part of the law. The panel decided Bailey did just that. Well done to them.

A few of these, will educate the liars or exaggeraters to change their furtive behaviour. The FA have stated this is to be deterrant.

 

[studio150]

Did you miss this bit?



Also - did you watch the slow mo part where it was zoomed in on a large-ish screen?
You would see that the Bristol player falling does not put his hands to his face (or around that area) until he has already hit the ground, it was not immediate (some replies sound like he did it straight away as contact was first made)

Also the other player striking him's hands do move upwards after contacting his chest as a part of the motion so it could have possibly have made contact higher up, including the chance it could have made contact with with his face too


I think the decision is extremely harsh and incorrect, there are far more blatant examples of simulation which the FA could have looked at and taken retrospective action over and use as a demonstration of their willingness to enforce the new rule, examples which were far more clear cut cases of simulation than this incident but they don't. Maybe this one was only examined because of the red card and there could have been an appeal (if the previous poster is correct, and a shove to the chest is only a yellow, it could be the only reason why it was examined)

There have been plenty of innocuous challenges that have left a player injured, sometimes serious and out for several weeks / months and are usually from the way they land or if they caught their studs, etc... Would the FA ban them too for simulation because those challenges wouldn't look like enough to justify the reaction (if this is the standard to which they judge, then the answer would be yes, they would be banned)

No I didn't miss that bit.
Yes the Bristol City player may have fallen in such a way to hurt his neck and back. However if yhat us the case why is it that his first reaction when he lands is to move his hands to his face.
The club's point about not approaching the ref or complaining about the Fulham us a red herring. The City player stays on the ground holding his face. The FA have viewed this as simulation as they believe he was not hit in the face and by staying day the FA believe it was a vlear attempt to indicate to the ifficials that he was struck in the face.
City have only posted one camera angle maybe the FA has more which indicates more clearly the actions of the City player.

 

[StonehamPark]

An aggressive shove on the chest, was turned into being poll axed, on the floor with awful skull pain.

Feigning injury to deceive an official, leading to a penalty or dismissal, is part of the law. The panel decided Bailey did just that. Well done to them.

A few of these, will educate the liars or exaggeraters to change their furtive behaviour. The FA have stated this is to be deterrant.

Off the ball incident. Being aggressively shoved to the ground. Easy red.
He's entitled to stay on the floor as long as he wants. He's not rolling around the pitch.

I'm totally against divers and cheaters, and have regularly called out both Kaz, Murray and Knocky for this.

The only slight aggravating factor is the very brief holding of the head.

 

[Da Man Clay]

Agree with this - to an extent. It'll be no good at all unless it gets applied to big names at big clubs.

A very fair point. Hopefully that is the next move.

 

[Algernon]

Alcock and falls.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Fulham manager Slavisa Jokanovic afterthe match: “I understand the linesman interpreted that Aboubakar kicked the player in the face. When I checked [the replay], Aboubakar pushed him in the chest, the kind of challenge that happens many times in the Championship. On the other hand he made a mistake and gave the referee the chance to show him a red card. We are going to appeal. It was a crucial moment." So Wright managed to convince the linesman that he'd been kicked in the head.

 

[Eeyore]

That is utter bullshit. He's definitely been shoved to the ground there.

He's definitely been shoved to the ground. That's for sure. He is making a meal of it too.

He wasn't struck in the head, mind. That's simulation.

 

[GT49er]

An aggressive shove on the chest, was turned into being poll axed, on the floor with awful skull pain.

And that I exactly the point that those criticising the decision are missing. Wright wasn't pretending to be fouled - he was fouled. What he was doing, apparently (and I haven't seen footage of the incident, so I'm relying on information gained from this thread) was pretending to have been severely hurt, or badly injured so that the offender might get a red card. He was pushed over ffs! Any of us who have played football will have been pushed over at some time - it really doesn't hurt much unless you break your arm (as I once did) or turn your ankle - and even then, it's you arm or your ankle that you clutch, not hands over face as if you've just been shot and think you're dying!