REFEREE

[S27 11]

Very poor decision from an extremely poor referee. Disgraceful play acting by Howson.Ayling should have been booked earlier for his tackle on Sainz. 

[Foxy2600 301]

It don’t matter - ref was looking for anything 

Anything that help’s Mugglesboro up. 

Borja Sainz has previous - easy target 

Nothing more than a yellow but it’s our loose cannon

 

[crab man 164]

Yep Yorkshire based referee. Bit sus that 

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

32 minutes ago, S27 said:

Very poor decision from an extremely poor referee. Disgraceful play acting by Howson.Ayling should have been booked earlier for his tackle on Sainz. 

Agree that Ayling should have been booked for his tackle on Sainz, but that doesn't exonerate him for planting his studs on an opponent's thigh out of frustration/petulance.

Could have been deemed a yellow on another day, but he's had a brain fade and it's cost us big time.

[Rich T The Biscuit 562]

1 minute ago, Feedthewolf said:

doesn't exonerate him for planting his studs on an opponent's thigh out of frustration/petulance.

Could have been deemed a yellow on another day, but he's had a brain fade and it's cost us big time.

That's a bit of a stretch, he's not kicked out or even thrust his leg forward. Yes he could have probably placed his legs differently but his legs remained the same position for the whole movement so never a red!

It's barely a yellow let alone a red, what it is is really poor from Howson who got a fellow pro sent off for what was the tiniest of touches.

[River End Rocker 44]

I'm angry with all parties in this. Howson cheated, Sainz was stupid, Madley incompetent and the team weak. 

But it is Howson, above all others , who merits the greatest condemnation.  I thought he was better than that. 

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

4 minutes ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

That's a bit of a stretch, he's not kicked out or even thrust his leg forward. Yes he could have probably placed his legs differently but his legs remained the same position for the whole movement so never a red!

It's barely a yellow let alone a red, what it is is really poor from Howson who got a fellow pro sent off for what was the tiniest of touches.

I thought the same until I saw it from this angle.

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

Madley changed the game with an appalling decision, not helped by Howson conning the ref. Appalling decision but nothing will be done and we'll lose one of our remaining wide players for 4 games. No wonder Madley is not a premier league ref. Furious.

[Petriix 2,838]

It's stupid but that sort of thing is always a red card because it's violence. You simply can't do it. The ref showed some extreme leniency to the Brough players prior to that point, probably even including the tackle which sparked the reaction. But, no matter how unjust it was, you can't do what Sainz did.

This is the second time now that he's cost us a game. Six more points and we'd be heading for the playoffs. 

[Rich T The Biscuit 562]

6 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

I thought the same until I saw it from this angle.

Still not a red, after Howson has cheated Sainz's legs are still not straight until after Howson has moved on.

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

1 minute ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

Still not a red, after Howson has cheated Sainz's legs are still not straight until after Howson has moved on.

That doesn't really correlate with anything in the laws of the game relating to violent conduct.

[Wilson 62]

There’s hardly any movement of the foot in to Howson

it cannot be violent conduct. 
 

if Beckhams kick was petulant I don’t know what you’d call that 

[Clever Farke 64]

He made no move with his feet towards Howson. He was if anything wanting to get up. It looks like he if anything avoided reacting. Even though Howson and Ayling had already been trying to wind him up. I hope Wagner backs him. It is one of the worst decisions I’ve seen.  Makes Beckhams World Cup red look like GBH. 

[ridgeman 131]

Why was their player not sent off when he stood on Harley’s foot after the ball had been played. If this red card is overturned will the game be replayed - No, will the PGMOL reimburse all those that travelled.

[Jim Smith 2,319]

Ayling not even booked for a far worse tackle. Howson went in two footed for the tackle that led to the red and frankly could have been off for that.

what frustrates me is that no pundit or commentator appears to actually look at the laws and what constitutes violent conduct or serious foul play because that was quite clearly neither and so is an utter joke.

Does not excuse our awful defending though. 

[Jim Smith 2,319]

11 minutes ago, Petriix said:

It's stupid but that sort of thing is always a red card because it's violence. You simply can't do it. The ref showed some extreme leniency to the Brough players prior to that point, probably even including the tackle which sparked the reaction. But, no matter how unjust it was, you can't do what Sainz did.

This is the second time now that he's cost us a game. Six more points and we'd be heading for the playoffs. 

It’s not “violent conduct” though is it. There is no force or movement at all. 

[KeiranShikari 1,412]

I think there was a slight movement towards Howson but it was a reaction to the poor challenge from Howson. Would imagine that's our only actual hope of getting it rescinded.  They tend not to work on common sense though.

[Duncan Edwards 2,237]

I can’t see how it’s any sort of card. Red, yellow, valentines, Mothers Day or any other kind. 
 

So annoying as we looked in complete control. Although how the loss of Sainz leads to what follows makes my head explode. 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,821]

9 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

That doesn't really correlate with anything in the laws of the game relating to violent conduct.

This is the from the laws of the game on the FA's website:

 

VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.

 

As I'm sure you know, I'm always one who defends the referee, but I fail to see anything from the angle you just posted (which is admittedly the only one I've seen) which constitutes violent conduct. 

There's no extension of the leg, no kicking motion, no change of angle. I get that the referee only gets one look and his angle was clearly different to mine, but based on the one angle I've seen, I think Howson has conned the ref there and made him think he saw something which didn't happen. 

I'm open to seeing a different angle which may change my view.

[Jim Smith 2,319]

1 minute ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

This is the from the laws of the game on the FA's website:

 

VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.

 

As I'm sure you know, I'm always one who defends the referee, but I fail to see anything from the angle you just posted (which is admittedly the only one I've seen) which constitutes violent conduct. 

There's no extension of the leg, no kicking motion, no change of angle. I get that the referee only gets one look and his angle was clearly different to mine, but based on the one angle I've seen, I think Howson has conned the ref there and made him think he saw something which didn't happen. 

I'm open to seeing a different angle which may change my view.

Agree entirely. Howson’s tackle on the other hand is a red card offence, as possibly was the earlier one by Ayling which didn’t get a card. 
 

[Mason 47 1,379]

Just now, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

This is the from the laws of the game on the FA's website:

 

VIOLENT CONDUCT

Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.

In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.

 

As I'm sure you know, I'm always one who defends the referee, but I fail to see anything from the angle you just posted (which is admittedly the only one I've seen) which constitutes violent conduct. 

There's no extension of the leg, no kicking motion, no change of angle. I get that the referee only gets one look and his angle was clearly different to mine, but based on the one angle I've seen, I think Howson has conned the ref there and made him think he saw something which didn't happen. 

I'm open to seeing a different angle which may change my view.

As I said on the other thread, I think the referee must be absolutely certain he's seen violent intent to give a red there. A yellow and a warning and no one would have thought twice.

[ron obvious 1,502]

The more I think about it the more I think Howson made his reaction to try & distract attention from Sainz coming off worse from what was essentially a coming together - basically it was an act of self-preservation by Howson. 

Unfortunately the ref was a complete Richardhead (as was Hull's ref last night).

[Google Bot 3,278]

The offside when Barnes headed through to Sarge was bizarre too, I can't see how that was called.

Sainz thing is going to come down to the appeal for me.  I think it's not even a yellow, as I just cannot see any intent or malicious there.  Howson on the other hand knew exactly what he was doing.

The other angles show that Sainz moved as Howson dragged his leg against him, which isn't so apparent in this lower view.

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

1 minute ago, Jim Smith said:

Agree entirely. Howson’s tackle on the other hand is a red card offence, as possibly was the earlier one by Ayling which didn’t get a card. 
 

Definitely a case for Howson's challenge being a red, from that still (although I've not yet seen replays). Ayling should have been cautioned for the earlier foul on Sainz IMO, but no way that was a red. As for Sainz, I agree that it's a very harsh interpretation of the law to send him off, but I can see how it could have been interpreted as such (and I've watched it at least a dozen times now). Very hard to make an argument for 'excessive force' or 'brutality'.

 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

24 minutes ago, Petriix said:

It's stupid but that sort of thing is always a red card because it's violence. You simply can't do it. The ref showed some extreme leniency to the Brough players prior to that point, probably even including the tackle which sparked the reaction. But, no matter how unjust it was, you can't do what Sainz did.

This is the second time now that he's cost us a game. Six more points and we'd be heading for the playoffs. 

Rubbish, look at the videos he did **** all. Not even a yellow in my opinion. Madleys appalling decision, no one else at fault. 

[Rich T The Biscuit 562]

11 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Agree entirely. Howson’s tackle on the other hand is a red card offence, as possibly was the earlier one by Ayling which didn’t get a card. 
 

It's that image that gets Sainz off his red card 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,821]

2 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Definitely a case for Howson's challenge being a red, from that still (although I've not yet seen replays). Ayling should have been cautioned for the earlier foul on Sainz IMO, but no way that was a red. As for Sainz, I agree that it's a very harsh interpretation of the law to send him off, but I can see how it could have been interpreted as such (and I've watched it at least a dozen times now). Very hard to make an argument for 'excessive force' or 'brutality'.

 

The only was it can be interpreted as a red card is if the ref thinks he has seen something that didn't happen, which would've been caused by the height of Sainz's foot and Howson's reaction. 

[Google Bot 3,278]

4 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Not even a yellow in my opinion

Agree, because if it's a yellow, it's a red regardless in a situation like that.  Should have just bought each together and told them to keep it calm, as Howson knows he's put a stud in there too.

[Ian 1,129]

Just a stupid decision for Madley to send him off. Nobody would have batted an eyelid had it been given as a yellow, or even just a free kick.

Totally unnecessary, if you want to argue that's a red by the letter of the law you miss the point of those laws being there in the first place.

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

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

The only was it can be interpreted as a red card is if the ref thinks he has seen something that didn't happen, which would've been caused by the height of Sainz's foot and Howson's reaction. 

The more I watch it, the more I am inclined to agree with you. It's certainly not natural the way that Sainz spins round and launches his feet upwards, though, so even though the contact was negligible (and certainly not using 'excessive force'), it's easy to see in the spur of the moment how the referee feels that Sainz has studded Howson's thigh and overreacted with the red.

Even knowing how much the panels tend to side with the ref where possible, I think we've got a decent chance of getting it overturned. A four-match ban for that seems ridiculous, especially if we can demonstrate that the tackle that caused the reaction was a red card offence in itself.

Edited March 6 by Feedthewolf