Murphy's red card

[Papa Lazarou]

If the FA don't rescind the red they are crazy.

 

[nwgull]

When do the FA review this now that the appeal has been submitted?

 

[S'hampton Seagull]

When do the FA review this now that the appeal has been submitted?

At some point before Saturday

 

[nwgull]

At some point before Saturday

Thanks. Looking at previous appeals, they usually get done by Tuesday evening.

I don't think that they'll rescind the card, but I do think that there's a decent chance that the automatic three match ban will be reduced.

 

[S'hampton Seagull]

Thanks. Looking at previous appeals, they usually get done by Tuesday evening.

I don't think that they'll rescind the card, but I do think that there's a decent chance that the automatic three match ban will be reduced.

Sorry, it just seemed like an open goal. I would guess by Thursday at the latest?

 

[BensGrandad]

The problem as always with a bad refs decision, assuming it is recinded, thus indicating the ref was wrong, it still cost us 2 points which could cost millions.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

The problem as always with a bad refs decision, assuming it is recinded, thus indicating the ref was wrong, it still cost us 2 points which could cost millions.

They aren't actually making a decision on if the ref got it wrong or right, because the FA/FL wouldn't actually criticise one of the own refs and say they got it wrong.

The red card itself isn't being rescinded or over-turned (it cannot be as the game has finished, the fact Murphy got sent off in that game will always stand) what they are making a decision on, and what the club are actually appealing, is the length of the suspension.

So even if the appeals panel decide that the 3 game ban would be excessive and Murphy should serve no ban at all, the ref didn't get it wrong sending him off in the first place, based on what the ref saw or thought he saw he will always in the eyes of the FA/FL have made the right choice. That's how good the FA/FL are at covering their own mistakes, they deny it was a mistake in the first place.

This is a quote direct from the FA memorandum of disciplinary procedures (a great bedtime read if you are having problems falling asleep)

This role is not to usurp the role of the Referee and the correctness of the dismissal from the Field of Play shall not be subject to any scrutiny by the Commission, will remain on the record of the Club and the Player, will remain the subject of the administration fee and will accrue the appropriate number of penalty points for a first team sending off.

 

[fleet]

I can't see how they will not overturn this decision and remove the ban, there was no intent, just a pure accident as he slipped. It would be madness to not overturn it. It would be like awarding the World Cup to a nation where it is impossible to play due to the heat in the summer ......

 

[nwgull]

The problem as always with a bad refs decision, assuming it is recinded, thus indicating the ref was wrong, it still cost us 2 points which could cost millions.

I predict that over the next 37 games, a ref will get a decision wrong in our favour that results in us winning a game we'd have otherwise drawn.

 

[dazzer6666]

I predict that over the next 37 games, a ref will get a decision wrong in our favour that results in us winning a game we'd have otherwise drawn.

Kaz was marginally outside the box when he was tripped at Fulham.......

 

[drew]

Could you argue that, as he slipped, he was not in control and so it is a red card?

 

[Safeway]

Are you saying you didn't see him slip or are you saying that that doesn't matter?

It DOESN'T matter. Chances are the ref didn't spot the slip and only saw Murphy connect with two feet, therefore correctly sending him off. There's a chance it might be overturned with the benefit of replays, but in real time I'd say the ref can't be criticised.

 

[Acker79]

The problem as always with a bad refs decision, assuming it is recinded, thus indicating the ref was wrong, it still cost us 2 points which could cost millions.

Did it? Or did Greer's miss at 2-0 cost us 2 points? Or did Kayal gifting Danns possession for their first goal? Or Hughton's decision to have March be the one up front when we were down to ten men? Or did March with his poor performance in that role? Or did Baldock for putting his early shot wide? Did we get let off with their disallowed goal and keep a point thanks to the refs (I've seen mention that some people think he was onside when the ball was played)?

I hate this idea that, in a match in which there are so many decisions, so many key moments, the result is all down to one refereeing decision - however right or wrong it is.

 

[spence]

Could you argue that, as he slipped, he was not in control and so it is a red card?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Kaz was marginally outside the box when he was tripped at Fulham.......

That was covered by the rule that momentum carried him into the box, so adherence to the rules, rather than luck.

 

[Lifelong Supporter]

It DOESN'T matter. Chances are the ref didn't spot the slip and only saw Murphy connect with two feet, therefore correctly sending him off. There's a chance it might be overturned with the benefit of replays, but in real time I'd say the ref can't be criticised.

Yes rather agreed. This is a very close one to call.

 

[BensGrandad]

Did it? Or did Greer's miss at 2-0 cost us 2 points? Or did Kayal gifting Danns possession for their first goal? Or Hughton's decision to have March be the one up front when we were down to ten men? Or did March with his poor performance in that role? Or did Baldock for putting his early shot wide? Did we get let off with their disallowed goal and keep a point thanks to the refs (I've seen mention that some people think he was onside when the ball was played)?

I hate this idea that, in a match in which there are so many decisions, so many key moments, the result is all down to one refereeing decision - however right or wrong it is.

I fully accept your view but ultimately it was the supply of the cross that Murphy would probably have cut out and March should have, had we had the full 11 on the field.at the time.

 

[Acker79]

I fully accept your view but ultimately it was the supply of the cross that Murphy would probably have cut out and March should have, had we had the full 11 on the field.at the time.

You have no way of knowing if Murphy would have cut out that cross. And the simple fact you admit March should have cut it out, means that goal is down to our own players, not the referee.

 

[BensGrandad]

Players out of position covering the loss of Murphy.

 

[Acker79]

Players out of position covering the loss of Murphy.

And? That's why there is a manager - to rejig the line up. If the players can't adjust, that isn't the referee's fault.