Callum McManaman (Wigan)...

[Sarisbury Seagull]

Utterly ridiculous decision.

There was no need for McManaman to go in like that, he could have easily won the ball without going in knee high, studs up. Obviously he never intended to injure the player (although that old 'he's not that sort of person' excuse is laughable) and regardless of whether he slightly touched the ball that was a completely reckless and over the top lunge and he should be banned at least 6 games IMO. That was a potentially leg breaking challenge and is the sort of 'tackle' that needs to be stamped out by strong sanctions so that the likes of Stoke's Shawcross and Wilkinsonand others stop doing it. The FA are totally spineless and Whelan and Martinez have gone down in my estimation for their response also.

We've got it so wrong in this country - we dish out long bans for taking shirts off, bad language, spitting, little trips and pushes on the refs (as stupid as these were) that don't actually casue anyone any real harm yet we don't punish challenges that can badly physically damage players.

 

[drew]

I thought Fifa had laid to rest this assertion that if an incident is seen by an official there can't be retrospective punishment?

 

[BensGrandad]

Apparently the 4th official saw the tackle but has not sad that it warranted a card and the ref says he didn't see it clearly so the onus is completely on the FA who have done FA.

 

[Ernest]

If Halsey and his officials don't think that is worthy of a card then maybe they should give the game up

 

[strings]

The FA are being consistent with their own rules (there's a first for everything).

The fact is they need to get off their arse and change the rules on retrospective punishment. I would allow retrospective punishment for fouls/incidents that should have been carded, and also for gaining an advantage by diving. *opens can of worms*

 

[BensGrandad]

According to Talksport the FA can only take action if the incident was missed but in this case the ref saw it and didnt even give a free kick and the lino saw it and ignored it so the FA cannot take action.

 

[wakeytom]

Should have gone in harder imho

 

[Hamilton]

.

You say I need to learn english!! One minute he missed the ball and the next he may have grazed it. There is no may about it. Watch the video and you can see he caught the ball first. Not full contact but definitely the ball first. As for your rubbish about being happy with the tackle, where did I say that? Or for that matter, where did I imply that I was happy with that tackle. This all started because you announced you were shocked by his indifference based on no evidence whatsoever.

As for football, haven't played since tore the two cruciate ligaments in my right knee when I was 21.

He did not get the ball. He was way wide of the mark. You take things too literally. The speed he was going at with his studs up, even if he had hit the ball more squarely there was only one thing that was likely to happen and that was an injury to the opposition player. The ball was immaterial in this challenge. It just happened to be in the way of his karate kick. If you can't see that you're blind. That being the case, I'm sure a career with FIFA or the FA beckons for you.

Oh and yet again, I draw your attention to my phrase "an incomplete picture." Do get someone in your family to explain this to you.

 

[drew]

He did not get the ball. He was way wide of the mark. You take things too literally. The speed he was going at with his studs up, even if he had hit the ball more squarely there was only one thing that was likely to happen and that was an injury to the opposition player. The ball was immaterial in this challenge. It just happened to be in the way of his karate kick. If you can't see that you're blind. That being the case, I'm sure a career with FIFA or the FA beckons for you.

Oh and yet again, I draw your attention to my phrase "an incomplete picture." Do get someone in your family to explain this to you.

Now all of a sudden you are telling all he was deliberately going for Haidara's knee. Turns out you are a mind reader after all!

As for 'an incomplete picture', I fully understand what that means, what I don't understand is how a grown up jumps to the conclusion of being 'shocked' on the basis of no evidence.

 

[joeinbrighton]

Nonsensical that on the same day that Callum McManaman gets no ban at all for a tackle that could have ended a player's career that Wilfried Zaha gets banned for a match for making a gesture when I dare say he was getting provoked.

Another example of how the authorities have no sense of perspective, witness how Nicklas Bendtner was fined about 3 times as much for endorsing a bookies on his underpants as the Serbian FA were for the racist behaviour of their country's supporters.

 

[Hamilton]

Now all of a sudden you are telling all he was deliberately going for Haidara's knee. Turns out you are a mind reader after all!

As for 'an incomplete picture', I fully understand what that means, what I don't understand is how a grown up jumps to the conclusion of being 'shocked' on the basis of no evidence.

You're either not very bright or stubborn. My suspicions are the latter. Ah well, never mind.

 

[drew]

You're either not very bright or stubborn. My suspicions are the latter. Ah well, never mind.

You keep coming back for more but never really answer any challenges to your ill thought out comments.

He didn't get the ball when clearly he did.

You're shocked by his indifference when, even on the incompleted picture that was the highlights, there is no evidence he was indifferent.

You're not a mind reader but now you know his state of mind because the ball was irrelevant and you know he was going for the man.


As for the tackle, I've never said I'm happy with tackles like that but clearly you know my mind better.

For the record, I believe it was clumsy and reckless but not malicious. I think Whelan's comments are ill advised and I think the ref would have sent him off if he had actually seen it and he would have got a 3 match ban.

The FA could still have banned him retrospectively as Fifa have already stated that associations can act in this manner whereas in the past the FA have claimed it was a Fifa regulation preventing them doing so if one of the officials has seen the incident.