Gorkss: Red Card-Yes or No?

[Elm Park Pasty]

Have we put our appeal in yet over this weekend's sending off? Might as well just fire off the appeal letter now with a blank space marked *Please Insert Name Here* , maybe we could even get Don Goodman to record his commentary in advance, 'that's a sending off all day long'

[FridaysGhost]

Gorkss appeal upheld. I was wondering why this thread was still up?

[URZZZZZ]

well atleast we ent lost him for the ndext 4 games. would have been nice to see hector in action tho

[bcubed]

Not sure on the US-style 'player expelled' front (and this is coming from someone who is a big fan of American sports), but agree on everything else. I think it was Alan Partridge (the HobNob one, not Coogan) who summed it up best at the weekend on Twitter: For a referee, a red card should be a last resort, not a badge of honour. Too often it's the other way round. Referee's egos, cheating diving players and a general acceptance that anything with force is a red card is spoiling too many games.

so conversely do you think American sport suffers without a Red Card?

Personally i dont think so and yet there is way more respect for officials
Partly because the officials are more competent and have earned that respect

I still think kicking someone out of the game is a deterrent. It still penalises the team as they lose a key player, but it doesn't spoil the game as it is still 11 v11

I don't necessarily think some American sports suffer who use that format, but that's more because they have so many players naturally changing around during games. Ice Hockey, for instance, you have rolling subs and a large squad off the field where they can have like-for-like swaps in every position. So if you lose a star player and have to swap him for a lesser player in that position then yes, I believe it works.

My problem with implementing it in UK sports like football and rugby would be that clubs could abuse it. Almost using it as a 'free substitution' (although it would obviously depend on whether that expelled player gets additional punishments)...With limited subs, and some positions on the field that aren't covered on the bench, I just worry that you'd get yourself into a whole new world of conspiracies. Take the Tom Williams bloodgate example in rugby from a few years ago - have a winger come off because you need a fly-half to come on to take a kick. How long before a striker is ordered to deliberately get himself expelled from the game because a team is 1-0 up with 10 minutes to go, have used all their subs but want to get an extra defender on?

I'm sure there are plenty of holes in that theory, but that's a thought...

Its a good point and maybe the restriction on subs does make a difference
Could we increase the subs allowed, like they have done in Rugby?

But I'd still rather see a game as it was meant to be played 11 v 11

Two Champions League games this week have been ruined by a sending off - surely the idea is to see the best of European football pitting their wits against each other? Not a lop sided backs to the wall defensive battle

[Elm Park Old Boy]

Maybe the appeals panel just checks out the poll on Hobnob and takes their decision accordingly.

[NewCorkSeth]

Maybe the appeals panel just checks out the poll on Hobnob and takes their decision accordingly.

I think we have some serious dirt on the panel.

[Franchise FC]

the Red was out straight away - if they did talk it wouldn't have been much.

Lino: Bloody hell, get him off before there's a riot
ref: Where's that red one?

[Nameless]

But I'd still rather see a game as it was meant to be played 11 v 11

Two Champions League games this week have been ruined by a sending off - surely the idea is to see the best of European football pitting their wits against each other? Not a lop sided backs to the wall defensive battle

Both games were 'ruined' by the players not the ref, neither red was remotely controversial.

Are you really suggesting that the foul last night should effectively have gone unpunished ? If you were to do away with the red card in that situation you would also have to do away with the penalty and simply award a 'penalty goal' as they do in rugby. If players were allowed to take out attackers as they were about to score they would do so every time if they knew the sole punsihment would be a missable penalty.

And to be honest I think Arsenal and City were always likely to be on the defensive against the two best sides in Europe, even with 11 each.

[Franchise FC]

again (Woodcote)....it gets back to that same old, same old argument

A simple < 1 minute delay whilst the fourth official reviews the video evidence (yes just like the rugby does) of so many controversial scenarios, would put paid to all of this....and if done correctly, it wouldn't particularly affect the flow of the game anymore than it does already.

Until then, rightly or wrongly, the refs word is final....or at least it is overturned by the FA (by those that DARE challenge them).

Agree (with WR) that refs are poor and that reviews are long overdue
Football is so slow to change anything compared with other games

I would go further and use sin bins and only very very rarely a red card.

I don't want to go to a game and see 10 v 11 -whichever side is penalised it spoils the game.
In US football for example, even if a player is expelled from the game it's still 11 v 11.

So, player A kicks an opponent (possibly a key player) injuring them so the said player cannot continue, but the perpetrator is simply replaced with another player (B). Player B proceeds to do the same to another key opposition player, ad infinitum.

As for being slow to accept video replays, American Football has reduced the amount of relays because of the time it takes.
Then what happens when a debatable tackle occurs, but wins the ball to mount an attack from which the team score. When do you stop the game ?

[bcubed]

But I'd still rather see a game as it was meant to be played 11 v 11

Two Champions League games this week have been ruined by a sending off - surely the idea is to see the best of European football pitting their wits against each other? Not a lop sided backs to the wall defensive battle

Both games were 'ruined' by the players not the ref, neither red was remotely controversial.

Are you really suggesting that the foul last night should effectively have gone unpunished ? If you were to do away with the red card in that situation you would also have to do away with the penalty and simply award a 'penalty goal' as they do in rugby. If players were allowed to take out attackers as they were about to score they would do so every time if they knew the sole punsihment would be a missable penalty.

And to be honest I think Arsenal and City were always likely to be on the defensive against the two best sides in Europe, even with 11 each.

I'm not saying the reds were controversial. I am saying there should be a better punishment than reducing the game to 10 v 11. And why would you do away with the penalty? Use of sinbins could work and refs could apply that law with less fear and more consistency.

[Duke the Dog2]

You all seem to be forgetting that the rules have also changed so that refs are more often put in positions where more cards are potentially brandished (back passes, "offside", professional foul, tackle from behind, goal-keepers time holding the ball - is that still a rule? - goal scoring opportunities etc etc).

I reckon it's time to help them make better more consistent decisions. But it'll take years!

And no, I'm not a ref!

[SCIAG]

You all seem to be forgetting that the rules have also changed so that refs are more often put in positions where more cards are potentially brandished (back passes, "offside", professional foul, tackle from behind, goal-keepers time holding the ball - is that still a rule? - goal scoring opportunities etc etc).

I reckon it's time to help them make better more consistent decisions. But it'll take years!

And no, I'm not a ref!

I don't think that last sentence was necessary!

Just to clarify, yes that is still a rule, and you can't be cautioned for being offside.

[Franchise FC]

You all seem to be forgetting that the rules have also changed so that refs are more often put in positions where more cards are potentially brandished (back passes, "offside", professional foul, tackle from behind, goal-keepers time holding the ball - is that still a rule? - goal scoring opportunities etc etc).

I reckon it's time to help them make better more consistent decisions. But it'll take years!

And no, I'm not a ref!

I don't think that last sentence was necessary!

Just to clarify, yes that is still a rule, and you can't be cautioned for being offside.

Technically, you can - for persistent infringement, although I can't imagine it's happened.