Keeper Attacks Supporter and Match Abandoned (Dutch Cup Game -AJAX/AZ)

[Guest Stephen927]

There was a chance there for the supporter to do some serious harm to the keeper, he got what he deserved, though sadly that isn't the laws of the game. Keeper should have kept his cool better, no choice but for the ref to send him off.

[Dr.Spaceman]

The boot just got a brain

[Neil]

Should have got a teammate involved and done a 3D on him.

[Unbelievable]

Red card rescinded by Dutch FA. Fan was already banned from the stadium, but got in using somebody else's season ticket. FA to decide how to proceed next week based on reports from both clubs and referee (4 options: full replay, restart from where it was stopped, declare Ajax winner as they were in the lead or declare both teams losers for breaking the rules (AZ for leaving the pitch and Ajax for admitting a banned fan to the stadium and not having their security in order)).

 

edit: I find it quite fitting that the so-called fan appears to be wearing diapers. What a pillock. Fucking shit club too..

[Aphrodite]

Deciding the result will be the difficult bit.. I'd personally give Ajax the win as AZ left the pitch but there's no real easy answer for it.

[juniatmoko]

probably if the 10 other keeper teammate all help kicking that fan probably it ain't red card... so their own fault not think that way....  mass riot usually makes the ref buckle down to give red card

[JH]

Both broke the rules so it'll probably be either replayed or they'll both be chucked out.

[Aphrodite]

Both broke the rules so it'll probably be either replayed or they'll both be chucked out.

 

How did Ajax break the rules? Can they held responsible for a fan trying to decieve them?

[JH]

I believe they could have taken further steps to either a- prevent the banned guy from entering the stadium or b- preventing him from entering the field of play and reaching the goalkeeper

 

[Aphrodite]

I don't know, I think Ajax will get the win. They were 1-0 up against a team with 10 men, who voluntarily walked off the pitch. We'll see though.

[Unbelievable]

Both broke the rules so it'll probably be either replayed or they'll both be chucked out.

 

How did Ajax break the rules? Can they held responsible for a fan trying to decieve them?

 

They can be held responsible for letting a fan enter the stadium who has an active ban for physically harassing the stewards on match day and for making it possible for the fan to get onto the pitch (stadiums in Holland normally have a ditch to prevent this from happening. This bloke used a platform for disabled fans that was not guarded by stewards to gain access to the pitch).

[Superior Acuña]

Can understand the first attack, but don't respect him for that second dig on the floor.

[Jayson]

Really dont understand the controversy surrounding this.

 

Even if someone jumps at you first, you cant then assault them a couple times while theyre on the ground and carry on playing 

[Matt]

Can understand the first attack, but don't respect him for that second dig on the floor.

 

Why not? The fan appeared out of nowhere- my first reaction would be to disable the intruder to any extent possible. As said earlier, the guy could have been carrying a knife of anything. If someone jumped me out of nowhere, I'd try to kick the guy in the head too, who wouldn't? Maybe he should have whipped out the Queensbury rules.

[M4]

Wasn't there something like 30-35 minutes played? Can't find a video any more, they're all gone.

 

Edit: Yes, 36th minute it happened.

 

Most logical and fairest solution could be to just play the remainder of the match at later date, and in an empty ground.

[JH]

I do see where Aphro is coming from though.

 

Regardless of whether they were justified in doing so, AZ still left the field of play without the referee's permission. They need to be punished for doing so, otherwise it will set a precedent for teams to do the same in the future if they don't agree with an official's decision.

[M4]

They need to be punished for doing so, otherwise it will set a precedent for teams to do the same in the future if they don't agree with an official's decision.

 

I don't see that as being the case at all given how unique this situation is. The Dutch FA have pretty much said the referee's reaction was a little too hasty by overturning the red.

[Unbelievable]

They need to be punished for doing so, otherwise it will set a precedent for teams to do the same in the future if they don't agree with an official's decision.

 

I don't see that as being the case at all given how unique this situation is. The Dutch FA have pretty much said the referee's reaction was a little too hasty by overturning the red.

 

Aye. AZ did not necessarily leave the field because of the official's decision, but also because an opposition fan manhandled one of their players.

[Aphrodite]

They need to be punished for doing so, otherwise it will set a precedent for teams to do the same in the future if they don't agree with an official's decision.

 

I don't see that as being the case at all given how unique this situation is. The Dutch FA have pretty much said the referee's reaction was a little too hasty by overturning the red.

 

They've overturned the suspension not the red card. Makes no sense to me.

[Optimistic Nut]

As mentioned, that lad could have had a knife or anything. Can't blame him for self-defence while the stewards and police get involved. Would have made a mockery of the game had the keeper done nowt thinking 'hang on, better do nothing because I'll get sent off', and the lad got back up and stabbed him or something.

[Aphrodite]

They need to be punished for doing so, otherwise it will set a precedent for teams to do the same in the future if they don't agree with an official's decision.

 

I don't see that as being the case at all given how unique this situation is. The Dutch FA have pretty much said the referee's reaction was a little too hasty by overturning the red.

 

They've overturned the suspension not the red card. Makes no sense to me.

 

Later Thursday, the Dutch football association rescinded the red card, saying Alvarado's reaction was triggered by the unprovoked attack on him - but adding that referee Bas Nijhuis was acting according to the rules when he sent the goalkeeper off.

 

 

 

[M4]

I see. They're saying that if the game is to be completed it would be without the keeper then.

 

Just that he isn't to face any further charges/suspensions.

[Aphrodite]

I see. If the game is to be completed it would be without the keeper then.

 

Just that he isn't to face any further charges/suspensions.

 

Yeah. This quote from the same article made me laugh.

 

He [Ajax director] added that the fan "had made it known that he detests the AZ keeper and that's why he attacked him.''

 

Fair enough then.

 

 

[thomas]

When the steward runs on I don't think the keeper immediately knew he wasn't another attacker, almost looks ready to take them on too. 

 

I hope all the admonishments in this thread for the kick after the attacker is on the ground are gentle ones at worst.  A person has just been attacked, he tries to neutralize a threat.  OTT would be going back in for kicks after the steward has pinned him.  All onus of civil rationality were already out the window when the attacker got involved. 

[JH]

They need to be punished for doing so, otherwise it will set a precedent for teams to do the same in the future if they don't agree with an official's decision.

 

I don't see that as being the case at all given how unique this situation is. The Dutch FA have pretty much said the referee's reaction was a little too hasty by overturning the red.

 

But regardless, it will set a precedent for a team that doesn't agree with a referee's decision to just round up and leave the field of play. We'll have teams leaving the pitch every week midway through a game.