Take him or leave him- Rooney 3 game ban

[Triggaaar]

Why?

This isn't about dangerous play. It isn't about reckless challenges. It's about a lack of discipline, a lack of respect for fellow sportsman, it's about lack of sportsmanship. It is about going against the nature of the game.

He's not been banned for a lack of discipline or respect, he's been banned for assult, so I'd think the amount of force and level of risk of harm would be relevant.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

May get less than 3 games on appeal, take him.

 

[Acker79]

He's not been banned for a lack of discipline or respect, he's been banned for assult, so I'd think the amount of force and level of risk of harm would be relevant.

The lack of respect and discipline comment was more about why the law is there in the first place, more about him being banned for breaking the laws of the game than for what damage his law breaking cost.

He has been banned for violent conduct (kicking or attempting to kick, when the ball isn't there to be won - if the ball was there to be won it would have been serious foul play). While UEFA may have described it as an assault, that isn't what the transgression was.



Besides, there are many people arrested and charged with assualt for attacks that would not break bones, or risk breaking bones, because an assualt isn't about the damage done.

English law provides for two offences of assault: common assault and battery. Assault (or common assault) is committed if one intentionally or recklessly causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence. Violence in this context means any unlawful touching, though there is some debate over whether the touching must also be hostile. Confusingly, the terms "assault" and "common assault" often encompass the separate offence of battery, even in statutory settings such as s 40(3)(a) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

A common assault is an assault that lacks any of the aggravating features which Parliament has deemed serious enough to deserve a higher penalty. Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 provides that common assault, like battery, is triable only in the magistrates court in England and Wales (unless it is linked to a more serious offence, which is triable in the Crown Court). Additionally, if a Defendant has been charged on an indictment with assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH), or racially/religiously aggravated assault, then a jury in the Crown Court may acquit the Defendant of the more serious offence, but still convict of common assault if it finds common assault has been committed.

Damage done only comes into play when determining if the assualt also includes ABH which is its own offence.

 

[Acker79]

May get less than 3 games on appeal, take him.

May get more on appeal.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Leave him behind.

My 5 year-old son has recently started training with the local kid's side, he's been going for 4 weeks. As the kids met up last Saturday the talk among those who had watched the match was Rooney getting sent off.

I don't want my kid thinking it's cool or funny to kick the shit out of other kids, or for him to get kicked by another boy. You realise that England can really do without all the shit idiots like Rooney bring to the party. What sort of impression does it give when Rooney can assault another player (while the guy's back was turned, I might add), get a 3-match ban but then every current and former player in the media is there to kiss Rooney's arse and say we must take him to the Finals because he's a "world class player"?

He wasn't world class in WC2010. However, he does have a habit of getting himself injured, or sent off, or embroiled in media stories until "his head's not right".

England need to learn from the likes of Greece in Euro2004 or Germany in WC2010. Get rid of the egos, get rid of the WAGS, the baggage, pick a side that is untainted by previous failure and hungry for success. As an England fan I can buy into that much more than taking Rooney and the inevitable media circus that surrounds him.

 

[wizo7]

Surprised so many people have said no!
Thought it was a no-brainer that we SHOULD take him.
Our best player by far who we'll need ONCE we get into the knock-out phase!

 

[xLostprophet]

Well said Pavilionaire!

I couldn't agree more with your comments from start to finish.

I mean who's to say he will even be fit come next summer's tournament? We always have a big name injury before a major tournament & I'd fancy my chances that it would be Rooney who gets it.

We have until the middle of next year to sort this team out, & even now the Danny Sturridge's, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain's, Josh McCrechan's and Danny Welbeck's of this world are beginning to make themselves heard...

 

[Acker79]

Daily Mail are reporting that Capello has privately told Rooney he will be going. They mention this in the same article where they reveal Capello is publicly suggesting he might not take him if the ban isn't reduced, hoping the sponsors want the star names there. Way to help the cause, DM.

Fabio Capello pressures UEFA over Wayne Rooney ban appeal | Mail Online

 

[Commander]

He has to go. We have no chance of winning this tournament without him. We have very little chance of winning it with him, but if a miracle is to happen then it can only happen with him in the team.

Plus I honestly think this could be a blessing in disguise. IF we get through the group stages, then we will have done it without our best player, who is then (hopefully) fit and fresh to unleash on the quarter finals. Personally I think it would be better if he stays banned for the final group game, we should be good enough to get through the group without him as we can afford to lose to France. Although we could do without this as it would probably mean Spain in the quarters.

 

[Gritt23]

Too many other factors to take into account to say at this stage.

If he's in top form, and we don't have any others in the squad who are travelling hoping to shake off an injury, then YES, you take him.

Whereas, if he's in the (lack of) form of about a year ago, when he was moaning, groaning and wanting out of Old Trafford, while we are looking at a squad including, for example, Ferdinand struggling with a back injury, maybe Walcott coming back froma pulled hamstring, and we are taking a chance on Wiltshire, lacking match sharpness, then we couldn't include a player who is out for 3 games.

 

[AgerBomb22]

Brings into question that if Messi had done something like what Rooney did would he get banned from a big tournement?

 

[leigull]

Messi isn't petulant so wouldn't have done what Rooney did

 

[Paddy B]

We have no chance of winning this tournament. QUOTE]

Edited your post for accuracy

 

[Bold Seagull]

Leave him behind.

My 5 year-old son has recently started training with the local kid's side, he's been going for 4 weeks. As the kids met up last Saturday the talk among those who had watched the match was Rooney getting sent off.

I don't want my kid thinking it's cool or funny to kick the shit out of other kids, or for him to get kicked by another boy. You realise that England can really do without all the shit idiots like Rooney bring to the party. What sort of impression does it give when Rooney can assault another player (while the guy's back was turned, I might add), get a 3-match ban but then every current and former player in the media is there to kiss Rooney's arse and say we must take him to the Finals because he's a "world class player"?

He wasn't world class in WC2010. However, he does have a habit of getting himself injured, or sent off, or embroiled in media stories until "his head's not right".

England need to learn from the likes of Greece in Euro2004 or Germany in WC2010. Get rid of the egos, get rid of the WAGS, the baggage, pick a side that is untainted by previous failure and hungry for success. As an England fan I can buy into that much more than taking Rooney and the inevitable media circus that surrounds him.

It's all right to take a captain that allegedly racially abuses fellow professionals, sleeps with team mates girlfriends behinds his wife's back, regular chalks up 100's of parking fines from parking in disabled spots because he's such a role model, undermines his manager at the last international tournament, and currently doesn't look the best centre half in his club squad let along the country!?

Rooney's punishment is to get a 3 match ban, and so miss most of a major tournament. Terry's is to do whatever he wants, when he wants, and still gets the armband back!

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

He's a complete moron. But he's still the best forward we have by a long shot... which is annoying.

 

[Commander]

We have no chance of winning this tournament. QUOTE]

Edited your post for accuracy

That's not actually true though, is it? There are only 16 teams in it, and you can win this tournament by winning four games, drawing one and losing one. That isn't completely out of the question. Greece and Denmark have both won it in recent times when neither of them were by any means the best team in the tournament.

I still don't think we will win it though.

 

[Bold Seagull]

That's not actually true though, is it? There are only 16 teams in it, and you can win this tournament by winning four games, drawing one and losing one. That isn't completely out of the question. Greece and Denmark have both won it in recent times when neither of them were by any means the best team in the tournament.

I still don't think we will win it though.

It's an interesting point, play as a team and you have a chance. However, despite those teams coming from nowhere in '92 and '04, in the past 32 years, I'd say those 2 are the only examples out of 8 tournaments where the best team hasn't won it...

 

[Commander]

It's an interesting point, play as a team and you have a chance. However, despite those teams coming from nowhere in '92 and '04, in the past 32 years, I'd say those 2 are the only examples out of 8 tournaments where the best team hasn't won it...

So 25% of the time you don't have to be the best team. Sounds like we have a chance to me.

Realistically, how many teams in the tournament would beat us more often than we would beat them if we played them ten times?

Spain
Netherlands
Possibly Germany

Not sure there is anyone else who would, I think it would be fairly even between us an Italy / France / Portugal.

So we do have a chance.

Still cant see it happening though.

 

[Gwylan]

Realistically, how many teams in the tournament would beat us more often than we would beat them if we played them ten times?

Spain
Netherlands
Possibly Germany
...

Possibly Germany? Possibly? This is the team that beat us 4-1 less than two years ago - and that was with a young team that's only going to improve - while our creaking team, that looked a bit past-it then will be two years older.

If France play to their potential, they'd beat us pretty easily too.

 

[Commander]

Possibly Germany? Possibly? This is the team that beat us 4-1 less than two years ago - and that was with a young team that's only going to improve - while our creaking team, that looked a bit past-it then will be two years older.

If France play to their potential, they'd beat us pretty easily too.

Yeah, possibly. Nobody expected that German side to do anything in that World Cup, but they were young, fresh and hungry. Hopefully ours will be the same next Summer with these young lads like Jones and Welbeck etc coming through. I'm not holding my breath though, I expect we'll be back to the Lampard, Barry, Gerrard, Terry yawn-fest that we usually have.

You can say that about France, but if England played to their potential they'd beat virtually every team there, with the possible exeption of Spain, who we beat a few weeks ago. Any one of about 6 or 7 teams can win this tournament if they play to their potential.