Wilson red card

[Arthur]

I thought at the time that it was a ridiculous red card, but the more I watch the clip, the more it does look like there's a bit of intent on Wilson's part. Maybe you see what you want to see. I'd probably still appeal it, but it might be upheld.

There probably was intent, but it is a massive overreaction from the Huddersfield player who had committed a really bad foul on Wilson.

I think the club should appeal on the grounds that it is not obvious that Wilson lashed out and that it is far clearer that their player was play acting and also that the Huddersfield player (Thomas) clearly tried to influence the officials - none of whom appeared to to see the 'incident' that resulted in the red card

I don't envisage the Club appealing on the grounds you describe.

For the decision to be overturned, the Club has to demonstrate that a red card was clearly wrong. To my mind, this would mean showing either Wilson didn't make contact with the Huddersfield player or his contact was accidental.

To try to have the card rescinded on the basis the player has over-reacted to being kicked may, indeed, be true, but the fact that Wilson intentionally kicked the player, however minimal the contact, will, I think, be seen as enough of a reason for it not to deemed a clear mistake on the part of the officials.

[Holders]

Well said, Arthur, it really shouldn't have been necessary to spell it out like that. Wherever can be said about him looking away, face in the ground or whatever, it needs to be 100% clear for it to be overturned.

The simple fact remains that it was a stupid thing for a professional to do. 

[SG]

I thought at the time that it was a ridiculous red card, but the more I watch the clip, the more it does look like there's a bit of intent on Wilson's part. Maybe you see what you want to see. I'd probably still appeal it, but it might be upheld.

There probably was intent, but it is a massive overreaction from the Huddersfield player who had committed a really bad foul on Wilson.

I think the club should appeal on the grounds that it is not obvious that Wilson lashed out and that it is far clearer that their player was play acting and also that the Huddersfield player (Thomas) clearly tried to influence the officials - none of whom appeared to to see the 'incident' that resulted in the red card

I don't envisage the Club appealing on the grounds you describe.

For the decision to be overturned, the Club has to demonstrate that a red card was clearly wrong. To my mind, this would mean showing either Wilson didn't make contact with the Huddersfield player or his contact was accidental.

To try to have the card rescinded on the basis the player has over-reacted to being kicked may, indeed, be true, but the fact that Wilson intentionally kicked the player, however minimal the contact, will, I think, be seen as enough of a reason for it not to deemed a clear mistake on the part of the officials.

Contact doesn't need to be made - the law is kick or attempt to kick. So just the act strictly speaking is sufficient to be dismissed. So did he kick out or not - I couldn't make out from the looking at it.

[WestSussexWhite]

I thought at the time that it was a ridiculous red card, but the more I watch the clip, the more it does look like there's a bit of intent on Wilson's part. Maybe you see what you want to see. I'd probably still appeal it, but it might be upheld.

There probably was intent, but it is a massive overreaction from the Huddersfield player who had committed a really bad foul on Wilson.

I think the club should appeal on the grounds that it is not obvious that Wilson lashed out and that it is far clearer that their player was play acting and also that the Huddersfield player (Thomas) clearly tried to influence the officials - none of whom appeared to to see the 'incident' that resulted in the red card

I don't envisage the Club appealing on the grounds you describe.

For the decision to be overturned, the Club has to demonstrate that a red card was clearly wrong. To my mind, this would mean showing either Wilson didn't make contact with the Huddersfield player or his contact was accidental.

To try to have the card rescinded on the basis the player has over-reacted to being kicked may, indeed, be true, but the fact that Wilson intentionally kicked the player, however minimal the contact, will, I think, be seen as enough of a reason for it not to deemed a clear mistake on the part of the officials.

Contact doesn't need to be made - the law is kick or attempt to kick. So just the act strictly speaking is sufficient to be dismissed. So did he kick out or not - I couldn't make out from the looking at it.

However to play devils advocate, there is an argument to be had that their player has successfully deceived a match official, I would argue the limited (if any contact) and the subsequent Olympic diving display by their player was the main reason Wilson was sent off. I think if their player doesn't make a meal of it. He doesn't get sent off

[Arthur]

Contact doesn't need to be made - the law is kick or attempt to kick. So just the act strictly speaking is sufficient to be dismissed. So did he kick out or not - I couldn't make out from the looking at it.

I agree. However, if there were no contact, the Club could argue it was petulance rather than violent conduct. Even if we did, this may not be accepted as a mitigating factor, it is true.

[Arthur]

However to play devils advocate, there is an argument to be had that their player has successfully deceived a match official, I would argue the limited (if any contact) and the subsequent Olympic diving display by their player was the main reason Wilson was sent off. I think if their player doesn't make a meal of it. He doesn't get sent off

You may be right, but this is still not the same as saying the referee made a mistake in the way he applied the laws of the game.

[MickyAdamsFamily]

If there is an appeal, and I think there might be, I would imagine the angle they'll take is somewhat different. Wilson was on the receiving end of a late and violent challenge, that actually took place just off the pitch. While writhing in pain on the turf, and looking 180 degrees away from the guilty opposing player, Wilson's foot may or may not (video evidence is inconclusive) have made incidental contact with the Huddersfield player, at which point he feigned injury in the hope of avoiding punishment and (successfully) fooling the officials. In this effort he was aided by his teammates (particularly the odious Thomas), who surrounded the ref, remonstrating. It was physically impossible for Wilson to see the other player, or to even know where he was, as is clear from the video. This explains Wilson's authentic astonishment at being shown a red card, having just been cynically poleaxed by a thug. I believe that a frame by frame analysis of the video evidence cannot refute this version of the events (whether accurate or not, I cannot say). Nonetheless, the review committee may not wish to overturn the ruling on the day.
That's just my thinking, anyway...

[junior white]

However to play devils advocate, there is an argument to be had that their player has successfully deceived a match official, I would argue the limited (if any contact) and the subsequent Olympic diving display by their player was the main reason Wilson was sent off. I think if their player doesn't make a meal of it. He doesn't get sent off

You may be right, but this is still not the same as saying the referee made a mistake in the way he applied the laws of the game.

Didnt Sheff Utd (v Liverpool i think) get a penalty given against them and possibly a man sent off for an "intent" to commit a foul ? If someone things (i am not saying Harry did) he meant to make contact even if he didnt then it would still be seen as serious foul play i would guess. The rules are bonkers about this.

As I said earlier i think zero chance of it being overturned if we do appeal, which i have not seen the club say they are going to but then they do not need to make it public anyway

[Beamer]

I hope the panel will also look at the actions of the Huddersfield medic who is clearly shown looking up at what is going on around him having checked that the player was in fact not mortally wounded and clearly stops him from getting up. The player puts an arm out to be helped to his feet and is told to stay down as the ref is taking advice about cards. He then puts a hand on his leg as if still treating him although is simply ensuring he doesn't get up and demonstrate that he isn't actually injured at all.
Some of the blatant fouls and intimidation especially to Carvalho and Wilson were little short of common assault - welcome back to the Championship boys.

[Pluto]

Does anyone have the video? I was strongly convinced it was not intentional but it seems many people think otherwise. I was watching it full speed on a stream though so would be interested to see it again.

[junior white]

Does anyone have the video? I was strongly convinced it was not intentional but it seems many people think otherwise. I was watching it full speed on a stream though so would be interested to see it again.

I dont have a link, but the stream i saw on the replay the legs goes out but it is hard (for me anyway) to say it was intentional. However if any of the officials said they felt it was, and even then if contact wasnt made, he can be sent off. It does for me though at that stage become subjective as no one knows what he was thinking only he does. If of course contact was made then he would have gone, we saw those types of thing in the prem last year.

If we appeal i have very little doubt it will be thrown out. Not because i think it was intentional but just I do not believe they wont over turn it.

[Lordedmundo]

I hope the panel will also look at the actions of the Huddersfield medic who is clearly shown looking up at what is going on around him having checked that the player was in fact not mortally wounded and clearly stops him from getting up. The player puts an arm out to be helped to his feet and is told to stay down as the ref is taking advice about cards. He then puts a hand on his leg as if still treating him although is simply ensuring he doesn't get up and demonstrate that he isn't actually injured at all.
Some of the blatant fouls and intimidation especially to Carvalho and Wilson were little short of common assault - welcome back to the Championship boys.

I just re-watched from the full march video now on the official site (which has the replays etc) and it does indeed appear that their medic is treating an invisible injury and definitely delays getting the player back to his feet in order to try and influence the referees decision.

The club should appeal, even it is just to highlight the blatant cheating and feigning injury by the Huddersfield player, along with the collusion from his medical team.

[perry geyton]

Need to see it from a different angle then the one televised, which was 180 degrees, need a side angle on it

To me he looked innocent and the Hudd player milked it hence the reaction of our players

[Kimbleman]

Well at least the cheating 'Terriers' had their cum-uppence with just ten Fulham players banging in an extra two for good measure. Best response possible to cheating and bully boy footballers 🤣😂

[cmg]

Well at least the cheating 'Terriers' had their cum-uppence with just ten Fulham players banging in an extra two for good measure. Best response possible to cheating and bully boy footballers 🤣😂

0001.jpeg

[Logicalman]

To be fair, we need not single out the medic or the 'injured' player in all of this, the whole game was dirty. The Huddersfield team went out of their way to target Wilson & Carvalho, it looked more like WWE that EPL (take note TK, you might have some more contestants for your 'other' project), what with pulling, clothes-lining and general ott tackling, for which the ref did nothing at all, and holds the sole responsibility for all this ending in a red card.

Should the club appeal? Yes, I feel that the incident had no intent by Wilson, his 'flaying' legs were simply he just trying to get himself straightened out I believe, and if, (massive IF) he did catch the other player then it was both minimal and purely accidental.

It was the fourth official who had the final word with the ref prior to him producing the red card, and the mannerisms of the fourth official towards some of the Fulham players during the match (on the few occasions he was on the feed) indicated he was severely biased.

[Fulham 442]

Surely we would have appealed by now if we were going to? We play Millwall tomorrow night after all.