- Jun 27, 2012
- 14,636
5 Live are reporting that the "FA are reviewing footage of the incident" in their morning bulletins.
Hemed stamp [Charged, appealed, banned for 3 games]
- Thread starter tiotom92
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
martin tyler
Well-known member
- Jan 25, 2013
- 5,969
Tough one this I personally think it's a deliberate stamp but that's only an opinion. No one will know except Tomer.
Personally I am hoping the ref saw it in the game and believes it was an accident and writes his report up that way. Otherwise we are at the mercy of a panel, but as evidence of similar incidents we could just show the Barton stamp
Personally I am hoping the ref saw it in the game and believes it was an accident and writes his report up that way. Otherwise we are at the mercy of a panel, but as evidence of similar incidents we could just show the Barton stamp
Full debate on Talksport going on now.......no consensus among those discussing it. One (Cascarino) saying 'definite ban', some not sure, Ian Abraham saying not a deliberate stamp, more a 'placing of his foot'
warmleyseagull
Well-known member
Think this will go one way only; shades of pointless appeal re DS at Boro. GM/IB had better be fit for Sunday else it is 4-6-0.
Its diametrically opposite to that, though.
The Stephens one - he had been found guilty (by Dean at the time) and we were asking the FA to reverse that decision (and thus undermine the ref).
Hemed doesn't stand guilty of anything, right now.
TheJasperCo
Well-known member
I think you've got to take into account the speed of the game. A slowed-down replay will always make a challenge seem more malicious than it actually was at full speed.
warmleyseagull
Well-known member
I did say shades of in acknowledgement of different situations. The shades of refers to the trial by TV evidence afterwards.
The first report described investigation of 'a stamp' The second report described investigation of a 'alleged stamp'.
What a shite house load of old bollocks is the workings of the FA and/or the reporting of its workings. Its all effing showbiz.
The decision taken will be the one that the committee of so called experts decide will be best for revenue.
Tooting Gull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,033
Graham Poll: "Andre Marriner appeared to miss the alleged stamp when Tomer Hemed clashed with DeAndre Yedlin.
There was contact on Yedlin's ankle but my first thought was Hemed tried to avoid his opponent.
The FA will look at it but the level of intent is hard to determine.
Chris Hughton backed his player and Rafa Benitez focused on the goal his team conceded, so my initial view that it was accidental would seem to be correct."
That's straight in to any club presentation - the considered view of a former top Premier League and World Cup referee.
1066familyman
Radio User
- Jan 15, 2008
- 15,235
Watching the replays on TV last night, looks deliberate to me to be honest.
Whatever happened to Britos btw for the tackle on Knocky? Now that was truly horrendous and deserved a lengthy ban.
Whatever happened to Britos btw for the tackle on Knocky? Now that was truly horrendous and deserved a lengthy ban.
Statutory 3 match ban, but management there 'not sure if he'll play for us again' according to the press
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
I'm trying to work out if this clip has been messed with. The full replay of the incident from behind looks to start at full speed, slow right down at the moment he lands on him - which makes it look deliberate - and then speed up again. But I can't be sure?
- Jun 27, 2012
- 14,636
I think the trouble is reputation. Shelvey has a reputation for being a nasty player (and rightly so), Hemed doesn't. However, objectively, both players were involved with their counterpart during the game leading up to the incident, both players were pointedly looking away from the counterpart and crucially both players could easily have avoided the incident all together.
They were both a deliberate act, but reputations will have a significant influence on any punishment.
Gritt23
New member
It didn't look malicious to me. I think he was just off balance and did come down on the guys leg, but without any excessive force. He caught him, but it didn't look like a deliberate stamp to me.
However, I think he will get a ban for it, simply because enough of a fuss will be made by Newcastle, and he will be treated as gulty (because his boot did come down on teh guys leg) unless he can prove it to be accidental, which he will struggle to do.
It'll be a 3 match ban.
However, I think he will get a ban for it, simply because enough of a fuss will be made by Newcastle, and he will be treated as gulty (because his boot did come down on teh guys leg) unless he can prove it to be accidental, which he will struggle to do.
It'll be a 3 match ban.
Making
an absolute joke of a decision if the same penalty was handed down to Tomer.
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
It was Yedlin's fault for trying to head-butt Solly's leg.Thought the yanks only did the knee thing when their anthem was playing!
Gully Forever
Well-known member
- May 9, 2011
- 1,704
let's all be very clear on this, He STOOD on his leg not STAMPED. very big difference. The player didn't even get hurt.