Norwich to appeal doc red card

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]Can''t see the decision being reversed - our home stadium isn''t Old Trafford, Stamford Bridge, Emirates or Anfield....[/quote]

 

Understood but it would have been a penalty for him because the "professional tackle" inside the area would have left both of them on the floor and Marshy to simply pick up the loose ball while both were grounded.

Red card, penalty, or play on?[;)]

You, the viewer, decide.[;)]

[James Kent 0]

I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is!

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[King Of The Mushrooms 0]

It was a penalty, from behind and he took the player, end of.

[Robert N. LiM 4,243]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[/quote]

If that''s true, then it''s a penalty, regardless of whether Doc got the ball. It''s astonishing that the vast majority of people who go to football, and have done for years, and I include myself in this, don''t know the rules. Thanks for the post lincoln.

I''ve never understood why they don''t have a ref as one of the pundits on MotD etc to explain stuff like this - it would increase respect for refs enormously if they did. As far as D''Urso is concerned, he had an awful game on Saturday, but I suspect he got the Doherty decision right. And I might be the only one, but I wasn''t convinced about Drury''s shout, either. Haven''t seen a replay, but then neither does the ref...

 

 

[Robert N. LiM 4,243]

And another thing. If lincoln is right, then

a) City are stupid to appeal. Surely someone at the club should know the rules?

b) Doherty was stupid to make the challenge. Surely a professional footballer should know the rules.

[Lennon7 0]

I really don''t see the point of appealing Doherty''s red.

That wasn''t what wound us up so much, it was the Drury incident and what they call the ''little decisions''.

 

We''d have lost anyway, weren''t good enough!!

[Marty 0]

[quote user="Bakerman8"]It was a penalty, from behind and he took the player, end of.[/quote]

 

well looking at the pic on the pink-un page right now it is not so obvious it is from the rear, also looks like good intial contact with the ball first, what happens to the player after this is not really relevent.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Robert N. LiM"]

And another thing. If lincoln is right, then

a) City are stupid to appeal. Surely someone at the club should know the rules?

b) Doherty was stupid to make the challenge. Surely a professional footballer should know the rules.

[/quote]

What I think is stupid is posters calling it a tackle from behind. The Doc made up the ground (that others couldn''t or wouldn''t do) and then made the tackle. The issue surely is whether bit was perfectly timed or not. It does appear he got the ball but that may not be enough to get the decision over turned. Whatever happens I regard it as fine committed defending from an honest committed defender.

 

[Jim Smith 2,314]

[quote user="Camuldonum"]

[quote user="braham"]just watched it like 20 times on sky plus. don''t think the doc did touch the ball adebola nicks the ball away just before doc makes contact. thats why it looks like he touches it adebola takes it in the direction that the ball would have deviated had the ginger pele got there first! may well end up 3 games instead of 2! on another note regarding our penalty shout, maybe drury should do the defender for assault![/quote]

I post this with some trepidation.  A friend who is a ref in Conference/League Two/lino League One (if your doomsayers are right you might meet him).  He is only 24 but says: "I''ve slow mo''d it.  I would flag it as a penalty as a lino and if up with play would have as a ref.  It''s a take out tackle for me - it fells the player and gives him no chance of going after the ball whoever diverts it.  The attacker is taken out of the process.  Impeding play I would say.  They could get away with it on appeal, will depend on the panel but, yes, I would have flagged or given it as a ref.  You have to give what you think at the moment.  Looking at it I would have given it.  It''s not a blatant unfair tackle, it''s a through the legs tackle which doesn''t matter outside the area.  It''s a pro tackle 50-50 risk but inside the area the attacker not only loses the ball whatever touch but is then taken out from recovery for regaining it - the keeper would come out and snap the ball out.

"Straight red card and penalty for me."[+o(]

[/quote]

Judging by that load of cr*p lets hope your mate never gets promoted to ref at a higher level then. Leaving aside the fact most of it doesn''t make sense he contradicts himself about 5 times. If thats the thought process of our highly trained referees then god help us!

[Jim Smith 2,314]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[/quote]

 

Whilst I accept it can be a foul if you take the ball firts then the player second surely then all sliding tackles are fouls as in the majority of them the defender takes out the forward. It appears (although i will admit its still hard to tell even in slow motion) Doc slides in, knicks the ball and then Adebola falls over his leg. How can that be a foul?

[Jim Smith 2,314]

[quote user="Robert N. LiM"][quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[/quote]

If that''s true, then it''s a penalty, regardless of whether Doc got the ball. It''s astonishing that the vast majority of people who go to football, and have done for years, and I include myself in this, don''t know the rules. Thanks for the post lincoln.

I''ve never understood why they don''t have a ref as one of the pundits on MotD etc to explain stuff like this - it would increase respect for refs enormously if they did. As far as D''Urso is concerned, he had an awful game on Saturday, but I suspect he got the Doherty decision right. And I might be the only one, but I wasn''t convinced about Drury''s shout, either. Haven''t seen a replay, but then neither does the ref...

 

 

[/quote]

 

I thought the Drury one looked a clear pen at the time and having seen the replay it looks even more clear. i also thought the defender handballing Russells shot (where he basically dived like a goalkeeper) and their defender hauling Cort''s shirt were pretty blatant pens as well.

I would agree though that the Doc incident is in my mind the least controversial because even if he got it wrong (and its still not really clear whether he did or did not to any of us - we could argue about it all day) I can see why it was given and a lot of other refs would have given it as well. my only gripe with the situation is how quickly he sent him off - it was almost as if it was the chance he had been waiting for!

[First Wazzock 902]

[quote user="Jim Smith"][quote user="Robert N. LiM"][quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[/quote]

If that''s true, then it''s a penalty, regardless of whether Doc got the ball. It''s astonishing that the vast majority of people who go to football, and have done for years, and I include myself in this, don''t know the rules. Thanks for the post lincoln.

I''ve never understood why they don''t have a ref as one of the pundits on MotD etc to explain stuff like this - it would increase respect for refs enormously if they did. As far as D''Urso is concerned, he had an awful game on Saturday, but I suspect he got the Doherty decision right. And I might be the only one, but I wasn''t convinced about Drury''s shout, either. Haven''t seen a replay, but then neither does the ref...

 

 

[/quote]

 

I thought the Drury one looked a clear pen at the time and having seen the replay it looks even more clear. i also thought the defender handballing Russells shot (where he basically dived like a goalkeeper) and their defender hauling Cort''s shirt were pretty blatant pens as well.

I would agree though that the Doc incident is in my mind the least controversial because even if he got it wrong (and its still not really clear whether he did or did not to any of us - we could argue about it all day) I can see why it was given and a lot of other refs would have given it as well. my only gripe with the situation is how quickly he sent him off - it was almost as if it was the chance he had been waiting for!

[/quote]

If he gives the penalty and deems it a goal scoring opportunity he has no choice but to send him off.

[Crofty88 0]

How he got it sent off for it is beyond me!!!!! Super slow action replay shows him far from the tackle before contact. I''d reccomend adding to the 101 uses for Andy D''urso. Running out of uses for a F****ng useless referee. Can''t imagine him doing much else.

[Foxy is a Pleasure 0]

And hes won the appeal!

[WeAreYellows49 0]

He certainly has.  Well done NCFC for standing your ground.

 

Gary Doherty has won his appeal against the red card he received in Norwich''s 2-1 defeat to Bristol City at Carrow Road on Saturday.

Doherty was set to serve a two-match suspension for his second dismissal of the current Championship season, but the FA upheld the Canaries'' appeal against his sending off - for “denial of an obvious goalscoring opportunity” - and the defender is now free to face Preston North End at Deepdale on Saturday, and Burnley at Carrow Road on Saturday, February 21.

[Noseybonk 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[/quote]

WRONG!!!

[Jim Smith 2,314]

If we go down by one point we should consider legal action against these incompetent idiots, although to be fair we actually played better after the red card and the penalty perhaps fuelled by the sense of injustice!

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="Evil"][quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[/quote] WRONG!!![/quote]

 

no not wrong, the fa never said it wasnt a foul they said it was not deemed a red for a goal scoring oppotunity! read properly evil!

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="WeAreYellows49"]

He certainly has.  Well done NCFC for standing your ground.

 

Gary Doherty has won his appeal against the red card he received in Norwich''s 2-1 defeat to Bristol City at Carrow Road on Saturday.

Doherty was set to serve a two-match suspension for his second dismissal of the current Championship season, but the FA upheld the Canaries'' appeal against his sending off - for “denial of an obvious goalscoring opportunity” - and the defender is now free to face Preston North End at Deepdale on Saturday, and Burnley at Carrow Road on Saturday, February 21.

[/quote]

And well done Gary Doherty for making up the ground that others couldn''t or wouldn''t do, defending like a hero to make up for others mistakes and then taking criticisms for doing so.

The only mystery to be solved now is how D''urso managed to get from the centre circle to the incident so quickly with a hard on [:O]

Sorry Pete [:$]

 

[Noseybonk 0]

If it wasn''t a red, then it wasn''t a foul. If it wasn''t a foul then it shouldn''t have been a penalty.

Or am I being a bit thick?

[city4eva 207]

[quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="Evil"][quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[/quote] WRONG!!![/quote]

 

no not wrong, the fa never said it wasnt a foul they said it was not deemed a red for a goal scoring oppotunity! read properly evil!

[/quote]

 

Stop digging

[Andy Larkin 15]

[quote user="Evil"]If it wasn''t a red, then it wasn''t a foul. If it wasn''t a foul then it shouldn''t have been a penalty.

Or am I being a bit thick?[/quote]Just proves what we have all known about D''Urturd for soooooooo long doesn''t it!?

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Andy Larkin"][quote user="Evil"]If it wasn''t a red, then it wasn''t a foul. If it wasn''t a foul then it shouldn''t have been a penalty. Or am I being a bit thick?[/quote]

Just proves what we have all known about D''Urturd for soooooooo long doesn''t it!?
[/quote]

Hey Andy.. You''d be more than welcome at the Pickers Meet on Friday night. Ray''s family will be there and I''d love the chance to buy you a drink for your help in making the tributes happen[Y]

 

[Andy Larkin 15]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="Andy Larkin"][quote user="Evil"]If it wasn''t a red, then it wasn''t a foul. If it wasn''t a foul then it shouldn''t have been a penalty. Or am I being a bit thick?[/quote]Just proves what we have all known about D''Urturd for soooooooo long doesn''t it!?[/quote]

Hey Andy.. You''d be more than welcome at the Pickers Meet on Friday night. Ray''s family will be there and I''d love the chance to buy you a drink for your help in making the tributes happen[Y]

 

[/quote]NN… PM''d you mate!

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Andy Larkin"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="Andy Larkin"][quote user="Evil"]If it wasn''t a red, then it wasn''t a foul. If it wasn''t a foul then it shouldn''t have been a penalty. Or am I being a bit thick?[/quote]

Just proves what we have all known about D''Urturd for soooooooo long doesn''t it!?
[/quote]

Hey Andy.. You''d be more than welcome at the Pickers Meet on Friday night. Ray''s family will be there and I''d love the chance to buy you a drink for your help in making the tributes happen[Y]

 

[/quote]

NN… PM''d you mate!
[/quote]

Not got it.. try email

 

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="Evil"][quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[/quote] WRONG!!![/quote]

 

no not wrong, the fa never said it wasnt a foul they said it was not deemed a red for a goal scoring oppotunity! read properly evil!

[/quote]

 

 

What? Not a goal scoring opportunity? Yeah,right - 12 yards out, middle of the goal, with just the keeper to beat. D''urso clearly got the difficult decision wrong - either honestly or quite deliberately. What was really obvious was the speed with which the red card appeared and the glee with which it was shown. Yes, my chance is hear, let''s make the most of it. The linesman (sorry, assistant refereee) did what they all do - saw the card and then waved his flag to show his support. Pity the incompetents couldn''t have been equally honest or dishonest with the Drury incident. Or perhaps they were.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="Webbo118"][quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="Evil"][quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]I don''t think it matters what happens to the player as long as the ball in taken first, which it clearly is![/quote]

 

disagree with this mate - there are two factors that must be evident to make a legal tackle,

1.there must be clear evidence that the control of the ball is taken away from the player in possession.

2. the tackler can make contact with the player on the ball but only after contact with the ball to take possession away.

 

cleary doc was ok with touching the ball first but he did not take control of the ball or remove full control from adebola. The penalty is the correct decision. People who think as long as you touch the ball first its a fair tackle without considering point 1 are wrong

[/quote] WRONG!!![/quote]

 

no not wrong, the fa never said it wasnt a foul they said it was not deemed a red for a goal scoring oppotunity! read properly evil!

[/quote]

 

 

What? Not a goal scoring opportunity? Yeah,right - 12 yards out, middle of the goal, with just the keeper to beat. D''urso clearly got the difficult decision wrong - either honestly or quite deliberately. What was really obvious was the speed with which the red card appeared and the glee with which it was shown. Yes, my chance is hear, let''s make the most of it. The linesman (sorry, assistant refereee) did what they all do - saw the card and then waved his flag to show his support. Pity the incompetents couldn''t have been equally honest or dishonest with the Drury incident. Or perhaps they were.

[/quote]

 

if you read what the FA say they overturned it for "denial of a goal scoring oppurtunity" whether right or wrong their saying  it was a foul but a red card was the incorrect decision.

god knows how the FA come up with some of their conclusions because its obvious it was a goal scoring oppurtunity, but their obviously trying to compensate city on a bad decision whilst still protecting the referee.

[Matt Juler 148]

According to a very badly written article on myfootballwriter, this was the first instance of the FA upholding an appeal from a Football League club.

[JTG 0]

[quote user="Matt Juler"]

According to a very badly written article on myfootballwriter, this was the first instance of the FA upholding an appeal from a Football League club.

[/quote]Really? Surely there must have been more obvious/clear cut appeals then this before now.I reckon the FA felt sorry for us after D''Arsehole''s performance.