Jim Smith 2,578 Posted November 15, 2010 Does anyone know if the card can be downgraded to a yellow because if it can i would think that would be the most likely outcome and then Holty will still miss the Leeds game anyway for accumlating 5 yellows. Still rather he missed that than the scum game. I think Leeds are bang average and Jackson/Martin could get some joy on the floor against their centre backs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gingerpele 0 Posted November 15, 2010 Do they downgrade cards?I thought all they do in terms of appeals, is scrap reds (i may be wrong).... (isn''t it also true that if a yellow card is given, nothing can be done about that? unless its serious misconduct or something, and the FA would look into that anyway) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 15, 2010 I think downgraded to a yellow is about the best we can hope for personally. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bluemike 0 Posted November 15, 2010 [quote user="Jim Smith"]Does anyone know if the card can be downgraded to a yellow because if it can i would think that would be the most likely outcome and then Holty will still miss the Leeds game anyway for accumlating 5 yellows. Still rather he missed that than the scum game. I think Leeds are bang average and Jackson/Martin could get some joy on the floor against their centre backs.[/quote]Mate If thats the case its better he misses the derby game cus we aint even that good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InLambertWeTrust! 0 Posted November 15, 2010 [quote user="bluemike"][quote user="Jim Smith"]Does anyone know if the card can be downgraded to a yellow because if it can i would think that would be the most likely outcome and then Holty will still miss the Leeds game anyway for accumlating 5 yellows. Still rather he missed that than the scum game. I think Leeds are bang average and Jackson/Martin could get some joy on the floor against their centre backs.[/quote]Mate If thats the case its better he misses the derby game cus we aint even that good. [/quote] You''ve changed your tune! OTBC! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ca 1 Posted November 15, 2010 [quote user="CT"][quote user="bluemike"][quote user="Jim Smith"]Does anyone know if the card can be downgraded to a yellow because if it can i would think that would be the most likely outcome and then Holty will still miss the Leeds game anyway for accumlating 5 yellows. Still rather he missed that than the scum game. I think Leeds are bang average and Jackson/Martin could get some joy on the floor against their centre backs.[/quote]Mate If thats the case its better he misses the derby game cus we aint even that good. [/quote] You''ve changed your tune! OTBC![/quote] He''s depressed after Saturday [:)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pete Raven 276 Posted November 15, 2010 Downgraded to yellow would put Grant Holt on 4 for the season.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chicken 0 Posted November 15, 2010 Really? I think its a borderline yellow. I have seen and had refs talk to both players after a challenge like that and not issue a card. He was a tad late but clearly didn''t intend to hurt Harte and was going for a loose ball. Contact was minimal.For me, if there is any justice, they will review the incident and give Harte a yellow as well. Talk about play acting, there wasn''t enough force in the challenge to justify him falling onto the floor and writhe around supposedly in pain. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sing up the river end 0 Posted November 15, 2010 When is the hearing ,anyone know ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sing up the river end 0 Posted November 15, 2010 never mind....tuesday Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chicken 0 Posted November 15, 2010 Probably what Lambert said to him at the end of the game - see you next tuesday ref. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ron obvious 1,710 Posted November 15, 2010 [quote user="chicken"]Probably what Lambert said to him at the end of the game - see you next tuesday ref.[/quote]Grin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pete_norw 0 Posted November 15, 2010 [quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="chicken"]Probably what Lambert said to him at the end of the game - see you next tuesday ref.[/quote]Grin.[/quote]Just read Hart''s Version on Reading''s web site, He believes, he did nothing wrong, Can''t wait for the return match. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ian James 0 Posted November 15, 2010 I have just emailed the FA. See email below.Hi Having watched the live football match between Reading and Norwich City on Sky Sports on Saturday I was so infuriated I felt I must write this email. Before we go any further, I must say I am not a Norwich City fan. I am a Stockport fan so I am not writing this without thought. It is not a heart on sleeve moan. Quite frankly the decision made by Michael Oliver to dismiss Norwich Citys Grant Holt was a downright disgrace. I have to admit, I feel that Ian Hartes reaction caused Mr Oliver to produce a straight red card, and not the "foul" itself. This, in my opinion, has cost Norwich City two points and I believe their supporters who paid their hard earned money to watch this game can feel quite rightly robbed. Of course, this result cannot be changed, but how many points will they also lose in the coming three matches without their top marksman if indeed you dont have the decency to overturn the decision. Common sense must prevail and I hope you see it for what it was. The guy didnt deserve it. If Mr Oliver is not up to the standard required to take charge of Championship games he should not be appointed for those matches. He lost control of the game and embarrassed himself in front of thousands of TV spectators. Personally, I watched in as a neutral in a pub in Manchester and the reaction from the 150 or so in there would agree with the above. I sincerely hope, for the good of league football, you overturn this gaffe and clamp down on idiotic refereeing decisions in future as it is not good for the sport. Many Thanks Ian James Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Felixfan 53 Posted November 15, 2010 A lot depends on the referee''s report of the incident. If he has any integrity he will do the honourable thing and say "I got it wrong guv" as this will do more for his career than trying to defend the indefensible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted November 15, 2010 Statto post coming up...I''m fairly sure cards can''t be downgraded - it either stays as red or is wiped out. If the panel feel it was a cardable offence then the red will stand - from memory the decision on what colour the card is is apparently subjective and should be left to the referee, or something like that.About the number of bookings Holt is on... the PA stats ([url=http://www.soccerbase.com/players_details.sd?playerid=17954]Soccerbase[/url]) say he''s on 4 but they make A LOT of mistakes - e.g. they have Crofts on 3 when we all know he''s on 4. I''d rather believe the Pink''un stats... no wonder smaller clubs like Hartlepool end up playing suspended players unintentionally. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LinkNR9 0 Posted November 15, 2010 The red card won''t be rescinded, because Oliver is the FA''s golden boy and they''d lose face if it was. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pete Raven 276 Posted November 15, 2010 [quote user="Northluck C."]Statto post coming up...I''m fairly sure cards can''t be downgraded - it either stays as red or is wiped out. If the panel feel it was a cardable offence then the red will stand - from memory the decision on what colour the card is is apparently subjective and should be left to the referee, or something like that.About the number of bookings Holt is on... the PA stats ([url=http://www.soccerbase.com/players_details.sd?playerid=17954]Soccerbase[/url]) say he''s on 4 but they make A LOT of mistakes - e.g. they have Crofts on 3 when we all know he''s on 4. I''d rather believe the Pink''un stats... no wonder smaller clubs like Hartlepool end up playing suspended players unintentionally.[/quote]Soccerbase is wrong. I''d trust Cuffley any day over PA. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jacko 0 Posted November 15, 2010 [quote user="Northluck C."]Statto post coming up...I''m fairly sure cards can''t be downgraded - it either stays as red or is wiped out. If the panel feel it was a cardable offence then the red will stand - from memory the decision on what colour the card is is apparently subjective and should be left to the referee, or something like that.About the number of bookings Holt is on... the PA stats ([url=http://www.soccerbase.com/players_details.sd?playerid=17954]Soccerbase[/url]) say he''s on 4 but they make A LOT of mistakes - e.g. they have Crofts on 3 when we all know he''s on 4. I''d rather believe the Pink''un stats... no wonder smaller clubs like Hartlepool end up playing suspended players unintentionally.[/quote]Not sure about that Northluck. I would say the West Brom lad blocking off DJ Campbell was a cardable offence but the red card was still rescinded at it wasnt deemed to be a clear goalscoring opportunity (something which is surely subjective and should therefore under the logic above be left to the referee''s discretion). I am still not confident it will be rescinded though because the FA will be mindful of completely undermining someone they have fastracked twice in quick succession. Very frustrating. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted November 15, 2010 I posted on another thread yesterday about how the FA seem less reticent to intervene with red cards when a professional foul (DACGO) is involved, probably because it''s much easier to categorically say from the footage whether the ball was played, whether there were defenders covering etc. rather than having to make a judgement on the amount/severity of contact. If you do a google search for "red card rescinded" or similar, the vast majority of results are about sendings off for professional fouls (we had one ourselves with Doherty the other year). It''s a good point you make about the Ibanez one still deserving a yellow though, would be interesting to know if that was downgraded or wiped completely.The logic I was on about is roughly what (as far as I was aware) they work on for bog standard "serious foul play". Judging how "bad" a tackle is is much more about opinions even from footage, which is IMO why they usually stick with the ref. Having said that, I think the amount of footage/angles available in this case - which make it much easier to construct a good argument - plus the amount of media pundits saying it was the wrong decision are heavily in our favour (which is why we could do without the likes of Mick Dennis piping up on TalkSport in support of the ref).So after all that, will it be overturned? Haven''t got a clue. I said 50/50 the other night and stick by it. [:S] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lambert is King 0 Posted November 15, 2010 [quote user="Felixfan"]A lot depends on the referee''s report of the incident. If he has any integrity he will do the honourable thing and say "I got it wrong guv" as this will do more for his career than trying to defend the indefensible.[/quote]As I understand it ( Pete please correct me if this is wrong ) the ref has the option to review the incident and withdraw the red card. This would mean that the reason for the appeal is that the ref has stood by the card and sees no reason to say he made a mistake. One poster has mentioned the various camera angles, unfortunately there is one angle that shows both of Holts feet leaving the ground in a jumping motion landning short of Harte and the contact came as though an after thought. Obviously no excuse for Hartes reaction. The other thing to note following on from this is Look East described it tonight as a 2 footed lunge. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Davo 0 Posted November 15, 2010 A two footed lunge? I didn''t see anything two footed in it and it''s no where near a lunge compared to Karacan''s attempted tackle on young Smith.Davo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jacko 0 Posted November 15, 2010 [quote user="Northluck C."]I posted on another thread yesterday about how the FA seem less reticent to intervene with red cards when a professional foul (DACGO) is involved, probably because it''s much easier to categorically say from the footage whether the ball was played, whether there were defenders covering etc. rather than having to make a judgement on the amount/severity of contact. If you do a google search for "red card rescinded" or similar, the vast majority of results are about sendings off for professional fouls (we had one ourselves with Doherty the other year). It''s a good point you make about the Ibanez one still deserving a yellow though, would be interesting to know if that was downgraded or wiped completely.The logic I was on about is roughly what (as far as I was aware) they work on for bog standard "serious foul play". Judging how "bad" a tackle is is much more about opinions even from footage, which is IMO why they usually stick with the ref. Having said that, I think the amount of footage/angles available in this case - which make it much easier to construct a good argument - plus the amount of media pundits saying it was the wrong decision are heavily in our favour (which is why we could do without the likes of Mick Dennis piping up on TalkSport in support of the ref).So after all that, will it be overturned? Haven''t got a clue. I said 50/50 the other night and stick by it. [:S][/quote]Fair play Northluck. Think I got the wrong end of the stick. This is the sort of decision that wont get overturned I dont think because there is enough doubt. I was certain Russell''s would be rescinded last year and it wasnt. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites