Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Saito

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Saito

    Does he have a 2 or 3 match ban?

  • #2
    I think three because it was a straight red. I thought two games are for two yellows?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by SheepRanger View Post
      I think three because it was a straight red. I thought two games are for two yellows?
      Straight red is 3
      2 x yellow is 1
      dissent is 2
      spitting 6

      no idea what the accumulated booked for the 2nd time spit in the refs face calling him a blind short fat tw@t

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Mem View Post
        Does he have a 2 or 3 match ban?
        Must've been deemed as Serious Foul Play by the ref to give a straight red so that's a 3-game ban.

        I'd appeal it personally. Yeah, can show an "horrific" still of studs hitting calf but that's not the whole story.... it was a trip, a swipe at a player running away, it was never gonna cause injury like a stamp, going over the top or some other force to a standing/planted leg.

        More generally, I think that any deliberate cynical "kicking out" foul should be a red on the basis it could injure an opponent. This idea of "taking one for the team" or getting a "good" yellow needs to stop. I say "kicking out" to cover instances like Saito's where it's clear there is not even a 1% chance of making a legitimate tackle - it is obviously a targeted takedown of the player. But, that ain't the rule so hence I feel an appeal is worth a go.


        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Abseits View Post

          Must've been deemed as Serious Foul Play by the ref to give a straight red so that's a 3-game ban.

          I'd appeal it personally. Yeah, can show an "horrific" still of studs hitting calf but that's not the whole story.... it was a trip, a swipe at a player running away, it was never gonna cause injury like a stamp, going over the top or some other force to a standing/planted leg.

          More generally, I think that any deliberate cynical "kicking out" foul should be a red on the basis it could injure an opponent. This idea of "taking one for the team" or getting a "good" yellow needs to stop. I say "kicking out" to cover instances like Saito's where it's clear there is not even a 1% chance of making a legitimate tackle - it is obviously a targeted takedown of the player. But, that ain't the rule so hence I feel an appeal is worth a go.

          You just pointed out the very thing imo most refs haven’t played the game to a decent level only reffed it to best of ability. Taking a yellow no different to what saito did a clip trip and over the top studs up both 3 game bans

          the wipe out smyth got same cynical yellow only

          no point appealing otherwise chance it becomes a 4 match ban

          The FA hopeless to pro bottom same for kids on a Sunday red card at 7-8 yrs old 3 game bans as a % 3 some cases 20 of a season then they pack up playing

          Comment


          • #6
            I reffed for years and he had to go

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by 72bus View Post
              I reffed for years and he had to go
              No doubt it was a red, no point in appealing or 4 match banproblem is where do you draw the line as smyth was motoring when cleaned out for a yellow equally as dangerous ?

              Comment

              Working...
              X