Elbows Jedinak

[drew]

It was no worse than the headbutt by Ivanovic but if you don't play for Chelsea you get hammered.
If you play for Chelsea you get your ban reduced.(Matic)

Very good attempt. Matic just pushed Barnes over, deserved red but it was just a push. Jedinak's elbow was dangerous. As for the comparison to Chelsea, did Costa get his ban reduced then?

 

[eagleseatseagulls]

First of all, as I think we can all agree, he's always been that much better than the thug that is Liam 'red card' Bridcutt

I'm not defending what Jedi did, he deserves the ban. What I can't understand is the blatant double standards of the FA's disciplinary panel when they let Craig Dawson's assault (elbow in the face) on Speroni go completely unpunished.

It's one rule for them and another for us obviously.

 

[Prince Monolulu]

First of all, as I think we can all agree, he's always been that much better than the thug that is Liam 'red card' Bridcutt

I'm not defending what Jedi did, he deserves the ban. What I can't understand is the blatant double standards of the FA's disciplinary panel when they let Craig Dawson's assault (elbow in the face) on Speroni go completely unpunished.

It's one rule for them and another for us obviously.

Awwwww, sh1t 'appens.

 

[Mackenzie]

He's a good enough player (strong tackler, good set piece) not to have to resort to that, hopefully the ban will see him alter his approach. 4 games is probably about right.

 

[spanish flair]

First of all, as I think we can all agree, he's always been that much better than the thug that is Liam 'red card' Bridcutt

I'm not defending what Jedi did, he deserves the ban. What I can't understand is the blatant double standards of the FA's disciplinary panel when they let Craig Dawson's assault (elbow in the face) on Speroni go completely unpunished.

It's one rule for them and another for us obviously.

O'h the conspiracy theory, have you thought perhaps your club and it crumbling ground is not wanted in the Premier league.
Not up to the standard of the finest league in the world perhaps?

 

[eagleseatseagulls]

O'h the conspiracy theory, have you thought perhaps your club and it crumbling ground is not wanted in the Premier league.
Not up to the standard of the finest league in the world perhaps?

Still on about our ground. Maybe one day you will have a team worthy of promotion and safety in the Premier League.

As it stands you're just about good enough to stay in the Championship.

 

[spanish flair]

Still on about our ground. Maybe one day you will have a team worthy of promotion and safety in the Premier League.

As it stands you're just about good enough to stay in the Championship.

So why do you think it is "It's one rule for them and another for us obviously" that you stated ?

 

[Easy 10]

He's a good enough player (strong tackler, good set piece) not to have to resort to that, hopefully the ban will see him alter his approach. 4 games is probably about right.

Disagree. It should have been at least double that.

It wasn't clumsy. It wasn't mistimed. It was a deliberate, calculated, violent assault with intent to maim. Its only blind luck that Sakho didn't end up having surgery to piece his skull back together that night. A stock 4 game ban for that attack is totally inadequate.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

I actually think he has a point, the elbow correctly got him a ban - but the media does drive the FA when it comes to bans- the witch hunter for Costa after the stamp was way ott.

The FA need to have a black and white system with after game suspensions, at the moment it's all so meh, which doesn't shock me. It's the FA

Yes, I agree entirely, the lack of transparency is shocking.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Disagree. It should have been at least double that.

It wasn't clumsy. It wasn't mistimed. It was a deliberate, calculated, violent assault with intent to maim. Its only blind luck that Sakho didn't end up having surgery to piece his skull back together that night. A stock 4 game ban for that attack is totally inadequate.

I agree and it matters not that it was a Palace player. It's incredibly dangerous and four game ban is very lenient. Thatcher got an 8 game ban for a deliberate elbow. What is the difference in offences?

 

[Westdene Wonder]

There you go. He's "NOT THAT TYPE OF PLAYER"

It is no surprise that Jedinak wins so many balls in the air because of his habit of using his elbows to injure his opponent,hopefully refs will keep a keener eye on him in the future

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I actually think he has a point, the elbow correctly got him a ban - but the media does drive the FA when it comes to bans- the witch hunter for Costa after the stamp was way ott.

The FA need to have a black and white system with after game suspensions, at the moment it's all so meh, which doesn't shock me. It's the FA

It is the fault of the FA. If they had a decent disciplinary process in place, it would not matter one jot what the media think.

A referee has dealt with it is a ridiculous notion, to kick us off. The referee doesn't have the benefit of cameras and replays. Cite a player afterwards. It is not undermining the referee.

 

[BensGrandad]

Disagree. It should have been at least double that.

It wasn't clumsy. It wasn't mistimed. It was a deliberate, calculated, violent assault with intent to maim. Its only blind luck that Sakho didn't end up having surgery to piece his skull back together that night. A stock 4 game ban for that attack is totally inadequate.

I agree irrespective of which player or club it was. This must be stopped and if it means a lengthy ban so be it.