[Albion] Dunk - straight red?

[Weststander]

The 5live example given was “You Need Glasses” = yellow.

 

[American Seagle]

Think the difference is saying ‘f… off’ is deemed less ‘abusive’ than personalising it directly by saying ‘you’re a ****ing ****’ or whatever it was Dunk was supposed to have said.

Lol come on. What about his body language and aggression is impersonal!?

 

[dazzer6666]

Lol come on. What about his body language and aggression is impersonal!?

Yeah but we see that every game. What doesn’t usually happen is players calling the ref offensive names directly

 

[American Seagle]

Yeah but we see that every game. What doesn’t usually happen is players calling the ref offensive names directly

Both are red cars offences. I would like to know why VAR did not get involved as it is a clear and obvious error not to send at least Haarland off there.

 

[Sarisbury Seagull]

Shame if Dunk had played today 2 of those goals don't happen

Yep. Dunk and Dahoud’s ill discipline has cost us points in recent weeks.

 

[Weststander]

Both are red cars offences. I would like to know why VAR did not get involved as it is a clear and obvious error not to send at least Haarland off there.

Dunk’s verbal assault was unprofessional from a captain, a deserved red, the sport would be mayhem if everyone behaved in that awful way. Leave the insults to us in the stands. His red mist is costing us dear, I hope he has regrets rather than remaining belligerence.

Do we know what Haaland actually said?

 

[American Seagle]

Dunk’s verbal assault was unprofessional from a captain, a deserved red, the sport would be mayhem if everyone behaved in that awful way. Leave the insults to us in the stands. His red mist is costing us dear, I hope he has regrets rather than remaining belligerence.

Do we know what Haaland actually said?

I don't have a problem with it apart from the rampant inconsistency and bias of the refs.
Dunk's actions have cost us. But if he was in a light blue jersey it wouldn't have. We simply have to compete to a higher standard than the big six. Both in terms of discipline and on field actions and in the boardroom. The dice a loaded and not in our favor.
Whether it is unconscious bias or deliberate it needs to be fixed.

 

[Cotton Socks]

I can say 'f**k off' in a variety of ways. It is exceptionally rare that I'll 'mean it' in a nasty way but people would know the difference. The point is he should be setting an example to the kids that were kicking the ball around the park this morning & not gob off to the ref. Doesn't matter who else is doing it. I used to use that excuse as a kid and when I was up to mischief & say 'but so and so does it', my mum used to reply 'if so & so jumped off a cliff, would you do as well'. He should know better, doesn't matter what everyone else is getting away with. However, the other side of me secretly thinks the ref was a bald pr**k and should f**k off. But you have to learn to say it in your head.

 

[trueblue]

Well Haaland was definitely screaming ‘f*** off you f***ing c***’ at someone at the end, which I took to be the officials. If so, obviously not foul and abusive in any way.

 

[Weststander]

I don't have a problem with it apart from the rampant inconsistency and bias of the refs.
Dunk's actions have cost us. But if he was in a light blue jersey it wouldn't have. We simply have to compete to a higher standard than the big six. Both in terms of discipline and on field actions and in the boardroom. The dice a loaded and not in our favor.
Whether it is unconscious bias or deliberate it needs to be fixed.

To compare we need to find out exactly what Haaland said in his face. Lip reading experts watch PL games, hence that silly game of all and sundry hiding their mouths when talking.

I’ve not heard any media suggestion so far that he personally insulted the ref with colourful language.

 

[American Seagle]

To compare we need to find out exactly what Haaland said in his face. Lip reading experts watch PL games, hence that silly game of all and sundry hiding their mouths when talking.

I’ve not heard any media suggestion so far that he personally insulted the ref with colourful language.

I am not sure the laws make any distinction. Not sure where the personal part has come from. Foul and abusive and foul and abusive - nothing to do with personal.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Maupay's was three games with no appeal by BHAFC as it could have been deemed frivolous with an extra game ban thrown in for good measure. Perhaps we will find out what Dunk actually said if the Maupay case is anything to go by...

https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2021/the-fa-v-neal-maupay---17-may-2021.ashx

I think they have to publish all of these, I guess it depends on what detail Taylor goes into, doesn’t seem the type to shy away

 

[AZ Gull]

I think they have to publish all of these, I guess it depends on what detail Taylor goes into, doesn’t seem the type to shy away

Maupay was charged by the FA, which is why there was a Regulatory Commission (and the document you link to was the finding of that Commission).

Dunk hasn't been charged with anything so there won't be a Commission or any such document.

 

[CHAPPERS]

But Haaland should’ve been booked.

He was booked.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Dunk’s verbal assault was unprofessional from a captain, a deserved red, the sport would be mayhem if everyone behaved in that awful way. Leave the insults to us in the stands. His red mist is costing us dear, I hope he has regrets rather than remaining belligerence.

Do we know what Haaland actually said?

Once again this narrative of Dunk's "Verbal Assault" and "red Mist"

Take another look at the offence.
He has paid the ultimate penalty, but his actions were nothing like the way you are describing them.

The red card offence was said as he had turned his back on the official and was walking away.
Stupid, but in no way was it an assault.

 

[JBizzle]

Once again this narrative of Dunk's "Verbal Assault" and "red Mist"

Take another look at the offence.
He has paid the ultimate penalty, but his actions were nothing like the way you are describing them.

The red card offence was said as he had turned his back on the official and was walking away.
Stupid, but in no way was it an assault.

Hyperbole, yes, but Dunk said something that was construed as personal abuse just after receiving a yellow and then received a straight red card.

Whether it's "verbal assault" or "naughty words", "red mist" or "silly sending off", the outcome is the same: our captain's ill-discipline has cost us dearly when he should know better. That's the narrative.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Hyperbole, yes, but Dunk said something that was construed as personal abuse just after receiving a yellow and then received a straight red card.

Whether it's "verbal assault" or "naughty words", "red mist" or "silly sending off", the outcome is the same: our captain's ill-discipline has cost us dearly when he should know better. That's the narrative.

Absolutely - but compare and contrast with the actions of Haaland.
The Hyperbole would not be unjustified in the way he has responded to the ref.

We are piling onto our captain about his discipline, when the reality is that his dismissal was as much down to Taylor's over-reaction as it was to Dunk's ill-discipline.