CheLOLsea

[TBM]

Does anyone know what was given, after the red card....was it a Chelsea or Burnley free kick or a throw (or wherever the ball went)

[No Fixed Abode]

I do see how some can deb8 the Barnes red though based around their view of the intent/recklessness.

Yep. Gary Neville knows nothing compared to you.

[YateleyRoyal]

I do see how some can deb8 the Barnes red though based around their view of the intent/recklessness.

Yep. Gary Neville knows nothing compared to you.

Are you suggesting that Neville's word is gospel and can't be questioned?

[No Fixed Abode]

I do see how some can deb8 the Barnes red though based around their view of the intent/recklessness.

Yep. Gary Neville knows nothing compared to you.

Are you suggesting that Neville's word is gospel and can't be questioned?

You're correct. We should respect the opinion of someone who hasn't played hundreds of games for Manchester United and hasn't won every top trophy there is to win over someone who has.

[Silver Fox]

I tend to take the opinions of any pundit who has never played for Liverpool with a pinch of salt

[Winston Smith]

I do see how some can deb8 the Barnes red though based around their view of the intent/recklessness.

Yep. Gary Neville knows nothing compared to you.

So people are not allowed to deb8 it now?

You are running a tough regime there, Kes Jong-Il

[No Fixed Abode]

I do see how some can deb8 the Barnes red though based around their view of the intent/recklessness.

Yep. Gary Neville knows nothing compared to you.

So people are not allowed to deb8 it now?

You are running a tough regime there, Kes Jong-Il

You can deb8 all you like m8. I didn't say you couldn't.

However, there's proper deb8ing and there's just disagree with everything I say deb8ing as you want attention from me hun xx

[Winston Smith]

You can deb8 all you like m8

Thanks m8!

[No Fixed Abode]

Matic ban reduced to 2 games by the FA.

[AthleticoSpizz]

Whatever for?

FA Setting a damaging precedent there.

[Winston Smith]

The members of the Commission accept the mitigation in respect of the level of force used by Mr Matic and the nature of the contact he made with Mr Barnes."

[AthleticoSpizz]

Ah, ta.

So, by the reduction, what they're saying is Matic's blatant foul was really only two-thirds a blatant foul?

[No Fixed Abode]

Whatever for?

FA Setting a damaging precedent there.

The dangerous precedent was set when Barnes got away scot free for a career ending challenge (twice) and Matic gets a two game ban for a push in the back.

[YateleyRoyal]

Whatever for?

FA Setting a damaging precedent there.

The dangerous precedent was set when Barnes got away scot free for a career ending challenge (twice) and Matic gets a two game ban for a push in the back.

So Matic's career is over? Or was it a potential career-ending tackle?

[AthleticoSpizz]

Sorry, I thought we were talking about Matic's blatant foul, I won't pull out the " rattloled" thing on you mind.

[Maguire]

Finally saw the incident last night, maybe Barnes was a bit naughty but the main thing I took from it was that Matic reacted so late you can't even claim it was a rush of blood, thoroughly deserved red

Proper lol at anyone saying Matic didn't deserve to be sent off. Clearest red card you'll ever see.

Barnes' tackle was a bit naughty though, for sure.

Disagreed. The clearest red you'll ever see is someone punching a fellow player or headbutting them, or even spitting. Laughable to suggest a push in the back is the clearest red you will see.

Yeah okay, the clearest red is committing rape and genocide in the centre circle, well done.

He sprinted ten yards and shoved a guy to the ground from behind. Red card all day long, no question at all.

[Maguire]

The members of the Commission accept the mitigation in respect of the level of force used by Mr Matic and the nature of the contact he made with Mr Barnes."

Has this ever happened before? I've not seen bans reduced previously because violent conduct wasn't "that violent".

Genuine question, no idea if it has or has not happened. Odd precedent to set if not.

[AthleticoSpizz]

Yep, but you say it so much better.

[TBM]

The members of the Commission accept the mitigation in respect of the level of force used by Mr Matic and the nature of the contact he made with Mr Barnes."

Has this ever happened before? I've not seen bans reduced previously because violent conduct wasn't "that violent".

Genuine question, no idea if it has or has not happened. Odd precedent to set if not.

I think they probably realise that the only reason he did it was cos of the almost leg breaking challenge so are using the "it was a shove to the back, not the head" line. I mean if Barnes was facing towards him and he pushed him, I doubt it would have been a red card - you see players pushing each other almost every week.

[Silver Fox]

If he'd taken a moment to think about what had happened and then got up, ran at Barnes and shoved him over it wouldn't be a red card if he was facing him? I think you've been listening to Kes for too long chap!