De Jong

[TJM]

There was some journo on Talksport reckoned there was nothing in the FIFA rule book which states retrospective action cannot be taken once a referee has dealt with an incident. Basically this line that the FA continually peddles is just a kop-out.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Seems a massive contradiction that referees get graded on their performance and can be demoted or promoted to higher/lower leagues based on what they get right or wrong in a game.

 

But then someone has his career seriously jeopardised by some thug and they're powerless to act, just because some useless referee saw the incident at the time and was too incompetent to take the appropriate action.

 

It's not a contradiction at all.

 

Some people have the authority to question the referees (The FA, the referee's assessors) and some people don't (John Terry, Sir Alex Ferguson).

 

There's no contradiction in that, it's about maintaining the referees authority. In theory, he should be above questioning from players and managers. As I said before though, we now have the problem that millions of people see and analyse every wrong decision.

[alpal78]

Seems a massive contradiction that referees get graded on their performance and can be demoted or promoted to higher/lower leagues based on what they get right or wrong in a game.

 

But then someone has his career seriously jeopardised by some thug and they're powerless to act, just because some useless referee saw the incident at the time and was too incompetent to take the appropriate action.

 

It's not a contradiction at all.

 

Some people have the authority to question the referees (The FA, the referee's assessors) and some people don't (John Terry, Sir Alex Ferguson).

 

There's no contradiction in that, it's about maintaining the referees authority. In theory, he should be above questioning from players and managers. As I said before though, we now have the problem that millions of people see and analyse every wrong decision.

 

If the nuance is on who is questioning the referee, then fine why can't the FA or referee's assessors (who can question) have a look at serious incidents and then decide that the ref did not make the right call, demote the ref (which they already do) and in addition impose a suitable ban on the player who was not punished?

[Guest elbee909]

 

If the nuance is on who is questioning the referee

 

Sorry to interrupt, but I don't think 'nuance' means what you think it means.

 

Carry on.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Seems a massive contradiction that referees get graded on their performance and can be demoted or promoted to higher/lower leagues based on what they get right or wrong in a game.

 

But then someone has his career seriously jeopardised by some thug and they're powerless to act, just because some useless referee saw the incident at the time and was too incompetent to take the appropriate action.

 

It's not a contradiction at all.

 

Some people have the authority to question the referees (The FA, the referee's assessors) and some people don't (John Terry, Sir Alex Ferguson).

 

There's no contradiction in that, it's about maintaining the referees authority. In theory, he should be above questioning from players and managers. As I said before though, we now have the problem that millions of people see and analyse every wrong decision.

 

If the nuance is on who is questioning the referee, then fine why can't the FA or referee's assessors (who can question) have a look at serious incidents and then decide that the ref did not make the right call, demote the ref (which they already do) and in addition impose a suitable ban on the player who was not punished?

 

Well I can't really answer for the FA, but I would think because there's a subtle distinction between assessing the performance of referees and actively reversing their decisions.

 

The first one is sensible, and helps to make sure the best referees are at the top. It is for the benefit of the game in general, and I guess wasn't intended as a matter for public debate (obviously in these days of media saturation it is).

 

The option you're suggesting goes much further, and seeks to redress any damage done to players and clubs. This is quite a big change in principle, and doesn't sit well with the idea that referees decisions are basically final and should be accepted.

 

The system doesn't want to pretend that referees are always right, but it does want to make sure their decisions are always accepted.

 

I agree this is slightly naive and has a bit of a logical flaw in it if you look hard enough, all I'm saying is I can see why the authorities are sticking by the system as it is. The principle is correct, it's just that times have moved on a bit.

[Tisd09]

I know its not for a tackle but didn't the Italian FA ban Gillardinho (sp?) for 3 games after video evidence showed him score a late winner in a league match with his hand? If the Italian FA can do this obviously Fifa cannot block it so it is really up to whether the FA deem it as something they can do. As pointed out on numerous occassions they were able to go back to the Ben Thatcher incident which didn't involve a player being out of the game for 6 months, as horredous that challenge was Mendes was only out for that game and the game after wasn't he, very luck considering the impact.

[David Icke - Son of God]

I know its not for a tackle but didn't the Italian FA ban Gillardinho (sp?) for 3 games after video evidence showed him score a late winner in a league match with his hand? If the Italian FA can do this obviously Fifa cannot block it so it is really up to whether the FA deem it as something they can do. As pointed out on numerous occassions they were able to go back to the Ben Thatcher incident which didn't involve a player being out of the game for 6 months, as horredous that challenge was Mendes was only out for that game and the game after wasn't he, very luck considering the impact.

 

Fifa have already said they wont stop FAs from taking action if justified. It's a cop out from the FA.

[steve_69]

This is Ian wright's view on it:

 

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/sunsport_columnists/3175090/Ian-Wright-If-FA-wont-act-put-Nigel-de-Jong-in-court.html

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Is it not a bit misleading to say things like the FA have 'copped out' or they're 'powerless to act'?

 

I would think it's more that they have a system of not reversing referees decisions after the event, and they've decided not to make exceptions in individual cases.

 

The whole point is that it was not deemed violent by the referee (who says he saw it), who is the best-placed person to tackle violence in the game.

 

He was obviously wrong, but referees sometimes are.

[Ant1815]

An interesting read, which suggests that the FA actually have copped out:

 

http://anotherarsenalblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/fas-own-guidance-contradicts-fa.html

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

An interesting read, which suggests that the FA actually have copped out:

 

http://anotherarsenalblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/fas-own-guidance-contradicts-fa.html

 

 

That's interesting reading, I certainly didn't know that the FA rules actually provide for retrospective action.

[alpal78]

 

If the nuance is on who is questioning the referee

 

Sorry to interrupt, but I don't think 'nuance' means what you think it means.

 

Carry on.

 

Nuance = A subtle or slight degree of difference, what did you think I was thinking of? 

 

[oldtype]

Well, I suppose they can't exactly come out and say "yeah we had a splendid night out with Man City's lobbyists and shared a good laugh about the idea that we could ever punish one of their players for injuring some nobody from a nothing club."

[Guest thepict]

I Have written to my MP, FA, FIFA and the Minister of sport. Dont expect anything to happen. But at least I have voiced an opinion.

 

[Raconteur]

There's a case in Australia from this weekend that is the exact opposite of the HBA-De Jong incident. I thought I'd reproduce it for your consideration - after all, the FFA is supposed to be bound by the same FIFA edicts as the FA...

 

'Bizarre' two-match ban brings Heart ache

 

MELBOURNE Heart is unhappy about the two-game ban imposed on its Dutch marquee player Gerald Sibon for a challenge on Victory's Grant Brebner on Friday night.

 

Football operations manager John Didulica described the match review panel's decision as ''bizarre'', and Scott Munn, the club's chief executive, was equally unhappy.

 

They believe that the matter was dealt with at the time by the referee on the pitch, who, they argue, saw the incident and took no action.

 

The upshot from this decision, Munn says, is a kind of double jeopardy where players can be tried and convicted retrospectively even if there was no charge in the first place.

 

''This particular decision amounts to the re-refereeing of a football match,'' Munn said yesterday.

 

''This was not a behind-the-play incident nor was it a serious infringement where the referee was not in a position to make a ruling. Quite the opposite; the referee was in very close proximity to the tackle, had a clear and unobstructed view of the tackle and no action was taken at the time. This notwithstanding, the independent match review panel has come over the top to effectively issue a red card.''

 

The club is also angry that there is no right of appeal against the panel's decision.

 

Maybe someone should forward this on to the FA with a "please explain"...?

 

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/soccer/bizarre-twomatch-ban-brings-heart-ache-20101012-16hxa.html

 

 

[Guest Loven11]

Manchester City manager Roberto Mancini has hit out at those who criticised Nigel de Jong after the midfielder's leg-breaking tackle on Hatem Ben Arfa.

 

Newcastle winger Ben Arfa had to have surgery on a broken tibula and fibula.

 

And it led to wide condemnation of De Jong, including from his international manager Bert van Marwijk who dropped the player from the Netherlands squad.

 

But Mancini said: "I'm very disappointed with the people who spoke about it. It was a normal tackle."

 

Ben Arfa went down from De Jong's challenge after only four minutes of City's 2-1 win over Newcastle on 3 October, before being stretchered off and taken to hospital.

 

But De Jong was not reprimanded for the tackle during the game by referee Martin Atkinson, nor will he face retrospective action despite calls from Newcastle for the Football Association to punish him.

 

And Mancini added: "I am sorry for Ben Arfa but these things happen in football.

 

Wanker....

[Skeletor]

It's ok. He'll be sacked before the season's up anyway.

[Mick]

It's ok. He'll be sacked before the season's up anyway.

 

I hope he's not sacked before he brings De Jong up here.

[binnsy]

Has the cunt or Man City issued an apology yet for his tackle on HBA?  I might have missed it but haven't seen or heard anything but did see something today about Mancini sticking up for De Jong and having a go at his critics.

[Ryan_Taylor]

See this Nigel? That's what you're aiming for

 

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/10/13/article-1320261-0B72810D000005DC-652_634x462.jpg

[CPL]

Just trying to calm the situation a bit more.

 

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/3182652/De-Jongs-fun-and-games-at-City.html

[beardsleymagic]

De Jong and Man City are just ripping the piss out of everyone now, especially the FA. They know that the FA will do nothing to punish him so they are rubbing their faces in it.

 

Whether De Jong is acting out the actual Ben Arfa incident or not, him and the rest of the Man City players and, more importantly staff, see the whole situation as funny.

 

Yeah, breaking peoples legs is funny. Unbelievable.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

Nailed on to get a soft red card this weekend

[Guest BEN BEN BEN ARFA]

When the son of the woman under suspicious

[Anderson]

When the son of the woman under suspicious