Klose suspension

[The Engineer 11]

Forgive me if this has already been posted/answered, I did search but found nothing... 

Timm Klose got a straight red, no? If so, then why has he only got a one-match suspension, as reported? Shouldn't this be three? Have I missed something in the rules? 

 

[Canary73 150]

Professional fouls count for just one I think. Violent conduct carries three games out.

[Foxy2600 297]

ManUre supporter at Stockley Park Amusement Archaic....Arcade. Feckin spell checker 

[Foxy2600 297]

It was neither. Rugby would call it ‘clearing  out’ - as  a CH of many years, that’s what you do. It’s not a foul. Certainly not a card of any description - but of course we have 7 cameras that can give some gimp an excuse.....

[Canary Jedi 573]

Klose was just being very affectionate!

[HazzaJet 252]

I saw a post about this topic once in the past. From what I seen over the years regarding dismissals it seems to me like:

2nd Yellow = 1

Professional Foul or Deliberate Handball = 1

Violent Conduct, Serious Foul Play, or Foul and Abusive Language = 3

If the player has already been suspended during the season I also believe they carry an extra match - when players pick up their 10th yellow of the season they seem to get suspended for 2 matches, and I’ve seen players who have already been suspended during the season sent off offences that usually carry a 1 match ban suspended for longer (had Godfrey committed the offence I think he would have been suspended for 2 matches or had Klose already been been suspended twice this season I think he would have been suspended for 3 matches)

 

[The Engineer 11]

Ah fair enough, makes sense now - thanks all! 

He could probably do with a game off to be fair!!

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

14 hours ago, Foxy2600 said:

It was neither. Rugby would call it ‘clearing  out’ - as  a CH of many years, that’s what you do. It’s not a foul. Certainly not a card of any description - but of course we have 7 cameras that can give some gimp an excuse.....

Hang on... are you telling me that you think Klose didn't foul Ighalo? Seriously? I think you're in a minority of one on that.

And what's rugby got to do with anything?

[Canary Wundaboy 1,358]

Professional fouls (last man, handball on line etc) are always 1 game. It’s only violent conduct bans that get you 3 games.

[Aggy 752]

1 hour ago, Feedthewolf said:

Hang on... are you telling me that you think Klose didn't foul Ighalo? Seriously? I think you're in a minority of one on that.

And what's rugby got to do with anything?

I think foxy might be getting centre half and fly half mixed up.

[Bill 1,788]

Not violent as said above, and would have been a yellow, or even not, elsewhere on the pitch

so I would expect (and hope) for a one match suspension

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

35 minutes ago, Bill said:

Not violent as said above, and would have been a yellow, or even not, elsewhere on the pitch

so I would expect (and hope) for a one match suspension

It'll 100% definitely be a one-match ban.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

3 hours ago, Feedthewolf said:

Hang on... are you telling me that you think Klose didn't foul Ighalo? Seriously? I think you're in a minority of one on that.

I'm not so sure of that - technically Klose did foul Ighalo but it was a foul that you see every week from defenders, in fact in most games, and I doubt that it even gets punished 1 in 20 times and certainly not a red card - add into that Ighalo's theatrics and it was a risible decision.

Also rather makes you wonder how VAR managed to make that a red, yet decided that Cantwell being cycnically wiped out by a violent challenge was perfectly OK, or rather it doesn't really its just the same old, same old treatment that you can expect when playing one of the elite clubs.

 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,777]

Klose's foul was a red card all day long, and you have to have some incredibly heavily tinted yellow and green glasses not to see it.

[Grant Holts Moustache 105]

5 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

I'm not so sure of that - technically Klose did foul Ighalo but it was a foul that you see every week from defenders, in fact in most games, and I doubt that it even gets punished 1 in 20 times and certainly not a red card - add into that Ighalo's theatrics and it was a risible decision.

Also rather makes you wonder how VAR managed to make that a red, yet decided that Cantwell being cycnically wiped out by a violent challenge was perfectly OK, or rather it doesn't really its just the same old, same old treatment that you can expect when playing one of the elite clubs.

 

It was a red. He prevented a goal scoring chance. You also see players booked for similar tactics most games when they do the same in the middle third to prevent teams breaking.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

4 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Klose's foul was a red card all day long, and you have to have some incredibly heavily tinted yellow and green glasses not to see it.

Not at all, like I said it was a foul (according to the laws of a game) but it is very rarely given as such by referees - which is one of the main problems with football.

Not specifically this type of foul but just in general the total inconsistency in which the rules are interpreted game to game and quite incredibly we seem to have introduced a mind-numbling stupid implementation of VAR which has actually made the problem worse.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

14 minutes ago, Grant Holts Moustache said:

It was a red. He prevented a goal scoring chance. You also see players booked for similar tactics most games when they do the same in the middle third to prevent teams breaking.

It has to be a clear goal scoring chance, last defender etc etc and I don't think it met the usual criteria for that although as in so many areas those criteria are somewhat subjective anyway.

Agree you often, quite rightly, get a yellow when stopping teams breaking (but not a red unless violent), so why was there no card when Cantwell was stopped by a violent challenge which was a nailed on yellow but potential red given the nature of the challenge.

Edited June 29, 2020 by Creative Midfielder

[C.I.D 302]

27 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Not at all, like I said it was a foul (according to the laws of a game) but it is very rarely given as such by referees - which is one of the main problems with football.

Not specifically this type of foul but just in general the total inconsistency in which the rules are interpreted game to game and quite incredibly we seem to have introduced a mind-numbling stupid implementation of VAR which has actually made the problem worse.

......but Premier League referees are under strict instructions to always give such decisions in favour of any top 6 club 😏

[Grant Holts Moustache 105]

1 hour ago, Creative Midfielder said:

It has to be a clear goal scoring chance, last defender etc etc and I don't think it met the usual criteria for that although as in so many areas those criteria are somewhat subjective anyway.

Agree you often, quite rightly, get a yellow when stopping teams breaking (but not a red unless violent), so why was there no card when Cantwell was stopped by a violent challenge which was a nailed on yellow but potential red given the nature of the challenge.

I don't think Cantwell was stopped by a violent challenge. Looked like a collision when they showed the replays. Free kick yes but red never.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

3 minutes ago, Grant Holts Moustache said:

I don't think Cantwell was stopped by a violent challenge. Looked like a collision when they showed the replays. Free kick yes but red never.

I'm happy to substitute deliberate collision for challenge but it was clearly deliberate and violent given the speed they were both travelling at and with the ball yards away.

I agree it would normally be a yellow rather than a red as McTominay's (I think?) elbow appeared to hit Cantwell just below his throat rather than a few inches higher which would have made it an automatic red. But I don't think he could have had too many complaints if the ref had decided that it was still dangerous play and produced a red.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

Also since the restart and with no crowds, we're seeing many fewer cards of either colour, which IMO meant that the Klose straight red was completely out of step with other cards being awarded.

 

Put it this way, does anyone seriously think that would have been a straight red if McGuire had done it ?  We'd have been lucky for him to get a yellow.

[Bill 1,788]

7 minutes ago, It's Character Forming said:

Also since the restart and with no crowds, we're seeing many fewer cards of either colour, which IMO meant that the Klose straight red was completely out of step with other cards being awarded.

 

Put it this way, does anyone seriously think that would have been a straight red if McGuire had done it ?  We'd have been lucky for him to get a yellow.

I think the City player would have been given a yellow for 'diving'

and see if you can find a clip of when Maguire blocked Buendia by stepping in front of him

the clue being Maguire moving - hence Buendia's loud protests

[Mason 47 1,373]

Personally I still think it was a harsh red. 

It is pretty much last man, and it is a foul. I don't think you can argue to vehemently against it. However, I think you can equally argue that Aarons is within stopping distance, Krul was quick out of the blocks and Igahlo also has his arm around Timm (that last point however is a real reach). I think it would have been no more contentious if it had produced a yellow.

Ultimately Klose stopped the attack and in the end we were within 3 minutes off of a shootout because of it. If it wasn't for the fact he's 50% of our fit centre backs, what he did was what most would expect from an experienced CB

[crispeduk 282]

And on VAR was Mr S.....

(But btw I thought it was a red although the Man U lump might also have been found guilty)

[essex canary 491]

In this sense we get punished for reaching an FA cup QF relative to Clubs that haven't. Absurd.

Still maybe Farke can now play Vrancic. He is one midfielder he has not yet tried at Centre Half.

[Aggy 752]

2 hours ago, It's Character Forming said:

Also since the restart and with no crowds, we're seeing many fewer cards of either colour, which IMO meant that the Klose straight red was completely out of step with other cards being awarded.

 

Put it this way, does anyone seriously think that would have been a straight red if McGuire had done it ?  We'd have been lucky for him to get a yellow.

Yes , if Maguire had rugby tackled a forward to the ground, with both arms completely wrapped around him and pulling him back, making no effort to even try and hide that he had got arms completely around him, all a yard outside of the box, then yes, I seriously think he’d have got a red.

Klose for me clearly does it because he knows the striker is getting the wrong side, there are a few minutes left and he doesn’t want to concede. Took one for the team, nearly came off, anyone suggesting it wasn’t a red though is, as suggested above, looking through very yellow and green tinted glasses.

[Aggy 752]

2 hours ago, Bill said:

I think the City player would have been given a yellow for 'diving'

and see if you can find a clip of when Maguire blocked Buendia by stepping in front of him

the clue being Maguire moving - hence Buendia's loud protests

I did think the Maguire block on Buendia was a foul. Also thought the “challenge“ on Cantwell on the halfway line was a definite yellow.

[NFN FC 1,122]

Will Tettey drop back to CB? 

[Bill 1,788]

11 minutes ago, NFN FC said:

Will Tettey drop back to CB? 

No other choice, unless steiperman can fill in, or maybe Lewis

[shaunieboy77 73]

Presuming Tettey does revert to centre back , who gets the nod to play alongside Mcclean. Personally I'd like to see Vrancic but I'd be surprised if he does.