Klaas
I've changed this
- Nov 1, 2017
- 2,663
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Was it a red for Bissouma?
- Thread starter Bozza
- Start date
CaptainDaveUK
Well-known member
- Oct 18, 2010
- 1,536
I do understand why Bissouma could be given a red card for a high dangerous foot, but surely it only became dangerous because the Newcastle player went to head the ball at exactly the same time. If you follow this logic, a player going for an over head kick could score then have his goal disallowed and be given a red card if an opposing player also went to head the ball at the same time, gets there a split second later and then gets kicked in the face. Not one Newcastle player appealed or remonstrated with the ref and everyone on the pitch seemed concerned for the injured player including Bissouma even after he was red carded. If VAR had not intervened nobody would have argued with a yellow card as everyone could see it was an accident. I think the original decision should have stood, either red or yellow as the ref saw it.
nicko31
Well-known member
There is no way he meant it but it was at best careless, at worse dangerous
Correct decision from me, we'll miss him
Correct decision from me, we'll miss him
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,319
So, having checked the rules my opinion of this is now it SHOULD NOT have been a red. The reason for this is it WAS NOT a table or challenge. Serious foul play is the only possible offence for the read:
‘SERIOUS FOUL PLAY
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.’
It wasn’t a challenge. He was trying to kick the ball.
Having said that, I can’t see a reason for a yellow either:
‘ CAUTIONABLE OFFENCES
A player is cautioned if guilty of:
delaying the restart of play
dissent by word or action
entering, re-entering or deliberately leaving the field of play without the referee’s permission
failing to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a dropped ball, corner kick, free kick or throw-in
persistent offences (no specific number or pattern of offences constitutes “persistent”)
unsporting behaviour
entering the referee review area (RRA)
excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal
A substitute or substituted player is cautioned if guilty of:
delaying the restart of play
dissent by word or action
entering or re-entering the field of play without the referee’s permission
unsporting behaviour
entering the referee review area (RRA)
excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal
Where two separate cautionable offences are committed (even in close proximity), they should result in two cautions, for example if a player enters the field of play without the required permission and commits a reckless tackle or stops a promising attack with a foul/handball, etc.
CAUTIONS FOR UNSPORTING BEHAVIOUR
There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour including if a player:
attempts to deceive the referee e.g. by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation)
changes places with the goalkeeper during play or without the referee’s permission (see Law 3)
commits in a reckless manner a direct free kick offence
commits a foul or handles the ball to interfere with or stop a promising attack
commits any other offence which interferes with or stops a promising attack except where the referee awards a penalty kick for an offence which was an attempt to play the ball
denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by an offence which was an attempt to play the ball and the referee awards a penalty kick
handles the ball in an attempt to score a goal (whether or not the attempt is successful) or in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent a goal
makes unauthorised marks on the field of play
plays the ball when leaving the field of play after being given permission to leave
shows a lack of respect for the game
uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands
verbally distracts an opponent during play or at a restart’
Conclusion by the laws of the game - NO CARD at all should be given
?
I guess it depends if you think he was making a challenge - he clearly wasn’t...
‘SERIOUS FOUL PLAY
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.’
It wasn’t a challenge. He was trying to kick the ball.
Having said that, I can’t see a reason for a yellow either:
‘ CAUTIONABLE OFFENCES
A player is cautioned if guilty of:
delaying the restart of play
dissent by word or action
entering, re-entering or deliberately leaving the field of play without the referee’s permission
failing to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a dropped ball, corner kick, free kick or throw-in
persistent offences (no specific number or pattern of offences constitutes “persistent”)
unsporting behaviour
entering the referee review area (RRA)
excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal
A substitute or substituted player is cautioned if guilty of:
delaying the restart of play
dissent by word or action
entering or re-entering the field of play without the referee’s permission
unsporting behaviour
entering the referee review area (RRA)
excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal
Where two separate cautionable offences are committed (even in close proximity), they should result in two cautions, for example if a player enters the field of play without the required permission and commits a reckless tackle or stops a promising attack with a foul/handball, etc.
CAUTIONS FOR UNSPORTING BEHAVIOUR
There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour including if a player:
attempts to deceive the referee e.g. by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation)
changes places with the goalkeeper during play or without the referee’s permission (see Law 3)
commits in a reckless manner a direct free kick offence
commits a foul or handles the ball to interfere with or stop a promising attack
commits any other offence which interferes with or stops a promising attack except where the referee awards a penalty kick for an offence which was an attempt to play the ball
denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by an offence which was an attempt to play the ball and the referee awards a penalty kick
handles the ball in an attempt to score a goal (whether or not the attempt is successful) or in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent a goal
makes unauthorised marks on the field of play
plays the ball when leaving the field of play after being given permission to leave
shows a lack of respect for the game
uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands
verbally distracts an opponent during play or at a restart’
Conclusion by the laws of the game - NO CARD at all should be given
?I guess it depends if you think he was making a challenge - he clearly wasn’t...
Cheshire Cat
The most curious thing..
Red
So, having checked the rules my opinion of this is now it SHOULD NOT have been a red. The reason for this is it WAS NOT a table or challenge. Serious foul play is the only possible offence for the read:
‘SERIOUS FOUL PLAY
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.’
It wasn’t a challenge. He was trying to kick the ball.
Having said that, I can’t see a reason for a yellow either:
‘ CAUTIONABLE OFFENCES
A player is cautioned if guilty of:
delaying the restart of play
dissent by word or action
entering, re-entering or deliberately leaving the field of play without the referee’s permission
failing to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a dropped ball, corner kick, free kick or throw-in
persistent offences (no specific number or pattern of offences constitutes “persistent”)
unsporting behaviour
entering the referee review area (RRA)
excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal
A substitute or substituted player is cautioned if guilty of:
delaying the restart of play
dissent by word or action
entering or re-entering the field of play without the referee’s permission
unsporting behaviour
entering the referee review area (RRA)
excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal
Where two separate cautionable offences are committed (even in close proximity), they should result in two cautions, for example if a player enters the field of play without the required permission and commits a reckless tackle or stops a promising attack with a foul/handball, etc.
CAUTIONS FOR UNSPORTING BEHAVIOUR
There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour including if a player:
attempts to deceive the referee e.g. by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation)
changes places with the goalkeeper during play or without the referee’s permission (see Law 3)
commits in a reckless manner a direct free kick offence
commits a foul or handles the ball to interfere with or stop a promising attack
commits any other offence which interferes with or stops a promising attack except where the referee awards a penalty kick for an offence which was an attempt to play the ball
denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by an offence which was an attempt to play the ball and the referee awards a penalty kick
handles the ball in an attempt to score a goal (whether or not the attempt is successful) or in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent a goal
makes unauthorised marks on the field of play
plays the ball when leaving the field of play after being given permission to leave
shows a lack of respect for the game
uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands
verbally distracts an opponent during play or at a restart’
Conclusion by the laws of the game - NO CARD at all should be given
I guess it depends if you think he was making a challenge - he clearly wasn’t...
How on earth do you conclude Biss was NOT challenging for the ball? I.e. a challenge?
Irrespective of whether you think it’s a challenge or not:
PLAYING IN A DANGEROUS MANNER
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
PLAYING IN A DANGEROUS MANNER
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
Anyway, it wasn’t deliberate but it as clearly reckless....red.
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,319
As there wasn’t a player by the ball, he was just trying to kick the ball and missed. That’s how, on earth. Don’t be so ****ing patronising all your life - seems a trait on here - who can be the most patronising smug ****!
- Apr 5, 2014
- 25,913
'SERIOUS FOUL PLAY
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play'
It was a blind challenge so I'd say that covers it.
Last edited:
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,319
You’re WRONG by the way
that is from the rules of free kicks NOT red card offences. Poor research to try and prove a point.There was a player by the ball though. If there wasn’t there wouldn’t have been contact, no free kick, no red card.
The ball was there to be won by both players, hence it’s a challenge.
The dangerous element is that Bissouma neither has his eyes on the ball or the player. His foot goes head height, studs first that’s surely dangerous in anyone’s book?
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,319
Having watched it again you may we’ll be right. But thanks for putting your opinion across in a non condescending manner, unlike Herr Krauty bollocks
symyjym
Banned
Defo a red for being out of control but a three match ban is too harsh because there was no intent. One match ban would be fair in this instance.
OzMike
Well-known member
Yes by the letter of the law though unintentional.
portlock seagull
Well-known member
- Jul 28, 2003
- 17,777
Bissouma should do a re release of the Carl Douglas classic, all proceeds going to the association for blind footballers.
Bisso was just kung-fu fighting
His kick was fast as lightning
In fact he was a little bit frightening
But fought with expert timing
Bisso was just kung-fu fighting
His kick was fast as lightning
In fact he was a little bit frightening
But fought with expert timing
Last edited:
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,501
Nailed on definite red. Completely accidental, hope the lad who got hurt is okay. Good show of class to check on him by Bissouma, who had an excellent game.
HastingsSeagull
Well-known member
Yes accident but dangerous. Red but should only be 1 game ban. The softest 'red' category possible if only rules worked that way.
Then again it's us not manure or someone so fully expecting retrospective action.
Then again it's us not manure or someone so fully expecting retrospective action.
Having watched it again you may we’ll be right. But thanks for putting your opinion across in a non condescending manner, unlike Herr Krauty bollocks
I wasn’t trying to be patronising or condescending*, more trying to show incredulity. My post didn’t come across well so I apologise.
* - not on this occasion anyway
father_and_son
Well-known member
Red, even before being called to the pitch side monitor. His foot is up above shoulder height with another player right next to him. Red every single time.
Obv not intent but that doesn't change the card.
Obv not intent but that doesn't change the card.