From the BBC feed:
1312:
FOOTBALL
Stoke's Robert Huth is charged with violent conduct in relation to an incident during Saturday's Premier League game at Fulham, the Football Association confirms.
Good! Throw the book at him.
Indeed DO throw the book at him ... and don't miss!!! :wine:
Quote from: cebu on February 26, 2013, 01:31:42 PM
Indeed DO throw the book at him ... and don't miss!!! :wine:
use "War and Peace" that's quite a big book
Quote from: cebu on February 26, 2013, 01:31:42 PM
Indeed DO throw the book at him ... and don't miss!!! :wine:
Lucky Jon Walters isn't throwing the book....
I had just the slimmest hope when I clicked this title that it would be in a court of law. Unfortunately the most it will mean for him will be a suspension, I'm pretty sure the man would better serve society by a stint in prison...
Quote from: CanadianCottager on February 26, 2013, 01:37:56 PM
I had just the slimmest hope when I clicked this title that it would be in a court of law. Unfortunately the most it will mean for him will be a suspension, I'm pretty sure the man would better serve society by a stint in prison...
What? So he can learn from pros how to assault others more effectively?
Throw the book...at his elbow. That will really hurt.
It would be good if Nzonsi was also charged. I know posters have said that that cannot be done if the referee showed the yellow card however it was not a normal foul but a deliberate slap to the face. Can he not be charged with bringing the game into dispute for giving such a fine example of fair play in front of all those primary school children?
Quote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on February 26, 2013, 02:06:36 PM
It would be good if Nzonsi was also charged. I know posters have said that that cannot be done if the referee showed the yellow card however it was not a normal foul but a deliberate slap to the face. Can he not be charged with bringing the game into dispute for giving such a fine example of fair play in front of all those primary school children?
The rules dictate if he gets booked you can't do anything.
It would be good if any ban included our next two games against Stoke! As it is another club is going to benefit from his absence for a "crime" committed against us.
Good news, gutless by Huth glad he has been charged
Huth charged . . . into the penalty area and assaulted Philippe Senderos !
Great news...couldn't believe he got away with it during the game...
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/02/23/article-2282978-1837609B000005DC-244_634x333.jpg)
and they have just put Upson out on loan 064.gif
Quote from: The Moose on February 26, 2013, 02:04:52 PM
Throw the book...at his elbow. That will really hurt.
If Senderos' head didn't hurt his elbow then nothing will.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21591518 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21591518)
Quote from: Roberty on February 26, 2013, 02:13:53 PM
It would be good if any ban included our next two games against Stoke! As it is another club is going to benefit from his absence for a "crime" committed against us.
...that is an
excellent point...
Quote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on February 26, 2013, 02:06:36 PM
It would be good if Nzonsi was also charged. I know posters have said that that cannot be done if the referee showed the yellow card however it was not a normal foul but a deliberate slap to the face. Can he not be charged with bringing the game into dispute for giving such a fine example of fair play in front of all those primary school children?
I am a bit confused. Someone correct me. You cannot get YELLOW FOR VIOLENT CONDUCT,IT IS A STRAIGHT RED. I assume then it was for a foul, if so the deliberate slap in the face is a separate issue meaning he can be charged. But then we are not privvy to the ref's report of the incident
The FA really need to drop this stupid yellow card rule. Basically the ref has screwed up so Nzonzi can't be punished. Crazy.
rather than have a go at the ref who was on the blind side and could only see the arm and not the contact, what about the linesman lokoing across the pitch, he owuld have been able to see the hand hit the face.
the ref should have put two and two together but he got no help at all as he didnt on the huth incedent
Surely by issuing a yellow though the ref has acknowledged that he has seen the incident. There is no middle ground yellow card here, he has either not seen it (no action taken) or seen it (red card).
Quote from: bulgariawhite on February 26, 2013, 05:16:03 PM
Quote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on February 26, 2013, 02:06:36 PM
It would be good if Nzonsi was also charged. I know posters have said that that cannot be done if the referee showed the yellow card however it was not a normal foul but a deliberate slap to the face. Can he not be charged with bringing the game into dispute for giving such a fine example of fair play in front of all those primary school children?
I am a bit confused. Someone correct me. You cannot get YELLOW FOR VIOLENT CONDUCT,IT IS A STRAIGHT RED. I assume then it was for a foul, if so the deliberate slap in the face is a separate issue meaning he can be charged. But then we are not privvy to the ref's report of the incident
Even if the yellow was for a foul, he still would have seen the contact with the face, and his decision not to punish at all it would preclude further punishment. I think the yellow must have been for the contact with the face, he just decided, for whatever reason, that it was reckless but not intentional. Or maybe he felt he wasn't sure enough of the intent to give the red. Don't see the harm in overruling him if the intent is more clear from replays though.
hemay have seen something but not the contact as it was. im not sayin he is right just saying his angle was wrong to see it as we did. the linesmans view straight across the pitch should have been better
The challenge on Ruiz was also a disgrace.
The pundits on MOD said without any hesitation that Stoke should have picked up two straight reds on Saturday.
Quote from: LBNo11 on February 26, 2013, 05:02:55 PM
Quote from: Roberty on February 26, 2013, 02:13:53 PM
It would be good if any ban included our next two games against Stoke! As it is another club is going to benefit from his absence for a "crime" committed against us.
...that is an excellent point...
my opinion too. We've been the ones hard done by so we should be the ones benefiting rather than Stoke's next 3 opponents. It's similar with a red card in the last minute of games.
Ban the whole team for 3 games - I've had enough of their anti-football
From the Hammersmith End I did not see either foul. I actually said to my pal that Stoke were playing reasonably clean by their usual standards.
Then I saw the highlights on TV....
By the way, I do not expect the assistant linesman to see everything either.
I think that the punishment should be points deducted for this type of behaviour. In any other situation it would correctly descibed as an assult. Untill such sanctions are used nothing will change and someone will be seriously hurt. If I wanted to see this stuff I'd watch cage fighting but I don't so I don't.
Off my soap-box now
Quote from: Keefy on February 27, 2013, 02:01:43 PM
I think that the punishment should be points deducted for this type of behaviour. In any other situation it would correctly descibed as an assult. Untill such sanctions are used nothing will change and someone will be seriously hurt. If I wanted to see this stuff I'd watch cage fighting but I don't so I don't.
Off my soap-box now
It doesn't sound like a soap-box tirade to me, Keefy, but probably the only thing that would stop Pulis and his ilk continuing as before.
Points deduction it is, then! :54:
Quote from: cebu on February 27, 2013, 05:05:54 PM
Quote from: Keefy on February 27, 2013, 02:01:43 PM
I think that the punishment should be points deducted for this type of behaviour. In any other situation it would correctly descibed as an assult. Untill such sanctions are used nothing will change and someone will be seriously hurt. If I wanted to see this stuff I'd watch cage fighting but I don't so I don't.
Off my soap-box now
It doesn't sound like a soap-box tirade to me, Keefy, but probably the only thing that would stop Pulis and his ilk continuing as before.
Points deduction it is, then! :54:
How many points?..
CNNSI is reporting that Huth has accepted a three match ban (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2013/soccer/wires/02/27/2080.ap.soc.stoke.huth.banned.84/index.html).
Quote from: beijing ben on February 27, 2013, 07:35:42 PM
Quote from: cebu on February 27, 2013, 05:05:54 PM
Quote from: Keefy on February 27, 2013, 02:01:43 PM
I think that the punishment should be points deducted for this type of behaviour. In any other situation it would correctly descibed as an assult. Untill such sanctions are used nothing will change and someone will be seriously hurt. If I wanted to see this stuff I'd watch cage fighting but I don't so I don't.
Off my soap-box now
It doesn't sound like a soap-box tirade to me, Keefy, but probably the only thing that would stop Pulis and his ilk continuing as before.
Points deduction it is, then! :54:
How many points?..
One isn't enough ... maybe 3 is too much?
However how about the idea that the team that were victimized (i.e. Fulham!) should be awarded the point or points deducted from the bad guys?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21591518 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21591518)
