Chelsea v Burnley

[smat]

Chelsea can't handle the multimedia Gooner assault.

*links to a podcast*

 

[Storzy]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31583092

Doesn't appealing run the risk of extending the ban, if the appeal is deemed frivolous? Or is this about getting Matic to play the cup final, but miss more league games?

EDIT: mind you the F.A should be able to work out the appeal before the cup final, so I'm not sure what Chelsea will gain from this?

 

[BlueBee]

Well Howard Webb said a push below the neck is a yellow card and above the neck is a red card....

I don't think there's any chance it will get overturned.

 

[silkyman]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31583092

Doesn't appealing run the risk of extending the ban, if the appeal is deemed frivolous? Or is this about getting Matic to play the cup final, but miss more league games?

EDIT: mind you the F.A should be able to work out the appeal before the cup final, so I'm not sure what Chelsea will gain from this?

Jose gets to add another string to the 'the world is cheating us' bow.

Whether it's worth losing the player for an extra game for is another question. There is absolutely no way they will overturn it.

 

[smat]

Just watched the highlights, here's my HOT TAKE:

• Neither of the penalty appeals were pens. Kightly doesn't have a clue where the ball is, and the Costa one's not a foul. If it was that easy to outmuscle Costa he wouldn't have scored so many goals this season. Pathetic.
• Watched the Matic incident several times and still don't really know if the Burnley player did that on purpose. It looked like nothing in real time, it looks bad in slow motion. But he might have just done it by accident.
• Matic... buddy... you can't do that. C'mon man.
• In the MOTD highlights, Chelsea's was the main game and the highlights didn't show a single Chelsea attack in the second half. If we're to trust MOTD's editors, they played shit. They played shit against PSG, needed a last minute goal against 10 men to beat Everton, conceded a goal against Aston Villa (lol!) and got thrashed at home by a League One team. And we're just talking about refereeing decisions. Chapeau, Jose.
• This concludes my HOT TAKE

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

Wut? Look where Kightly's arm is. Definite pen, that. Probably wouldn't be too fussed about the Costa one if it wasn't one of about four incidents in which we were HORRIBLY WRONGED, but still a peno. Dunno why everyone's going on about whether or not Barnes intended to MORTALLY WOUND Matic. If you catch an opponent like that it's surely a red card regardless

 

[smat]

Wut? Look where Kightly's arm is. Definite pen, that. Probably wouldn't be too fussed about the Costa one if it wasn't one of about four incidents in which we were HORRIBLY WRONGED, but still a peno. Dunno why everyone's going on about whether or not Barnes intended to MORTALLY WOUND Matic. If you catch an opponent like that it's surely a red card regardless

What's the law, tho? I think the law says it has to be deliberate, and then I just found this clarification from David Elleray about how they make decisions when the arm is in an unnatural position (as Kightly's definitely was): "If the ball hits the arm then the referee must decide whether this action was to deliberately block the ball or whether the player has raised their arms to protect themselves - especially if the ball is hit at speed."

It was neither of the above (think Kightly's arms were up because he was in the process of turning his back, like a coward? not because he wanted to stop the ball with them) but considering how hard Ivanovic belted it as well, and how close the two were, I'm with the referee. No intent, not a penalty, no injustice.

Maybe Barnes should've been sent off, it does look like it would have hurt. From the reaction I expected you to have been Øvreboed, but none of the decisions seemed particularly heinous calls to me. Certainly no worse than those which hamstrung Southampton against Liverpool, and the fallout from that is non-existent.

 

[Storzy]

Dunno why everyone's going on about whether or not Barnes intended to MORTALLY WOUND Matic. If you catch an opponent like that it's surely a red card regardless

I don't know mate, it as a hard one an aggressive one you know, but Football is man's game.

 

[Skinner]

Players on the receiving end of a potential leg breaking incident should be allowed to throw a free punch at the offender imo

 

[silkyman]

Why don't we just turn it into ice hockey and just let them have a scrap?

 

[MSB92]

Why don't we just turn it into ice hockey and just let them have a scrap?

That actually might be a very good idea!

 

[roversfan2001]

No action taken against Barnes.

 

[smat]

Can't see how they could have decided otherwise tbh.

 

[ZianfrancoGoal]

but you can't see anything it seems

 

[Tilbury]

Easily.
Whether or not it was an accident shouldn't be taken into account, a dangerous tackle is dangerous regardless.
His studs were up after the ball had been played.

 

[smat]

But the referee saw it. So the FA can't do anything about it now, according to their own rules.

 

[silkyman]

Easily.
Whether or not it was an accident shouldn't be taken into account, a dangerous tackle is dangerous regardless.
His studs were up after the ball had been played.

He cleared the ball and was bringing his foot down when the challenge came in from Matic.

 

[Humongous Fungus]

As a neutral I thought it looked horrendous at first but then I watched it at 'actual speed' a few times and realised it wasn't a bad challenge just unfortunate. Matic got to the ball very quickly and there was nothing Barnes could do about it, these things are going to happen unfortunately. I don't think Matic should really be punished for it either cause in the heat of the moment it's natural to see red, I'm sure he did well to restrain from doing more than push Barnes.

On a side note, it was funny to see Matic roll around a few times before springing up instantly to have a go!

 

[BlueBee]

But the referee saw it. So the FA can't do anything about it now, according to their own rules.

Well then he shouldn't referee in the premier league for a very long time. No fit and proper referee sees that challenge and believes it's not at the very least a yellow card.

 

[BlueBee]

Just watched the highlights, here's my HOT TAKE:

• Neither of the penalty appeals were pens. Kightly doesn't have a clue where the ball is, and the Costa one's not a foul. If it was that easy to outmuscle Costa he wouldn't have scored so many goals this season. Pathetic.
• Watched the Matic incident several times and still don't really know if the Burnley player did that on purpose. It looked like nothing in real time, it looks bad in slow motion. But he might have just done it by accident.
• Matic... buddy... you can't do that. C'mon man.
• In the MOTD highlights, Chelsea's was the main game and the highlights didn't show a single Chelsea attack in the second half. If we're to trust MOTD's editors, they played shit. They played shit against PSG, needed a last minute goal against 10 men to beat Everton, conceded a goal against Aston Villa (lol!) and got thrashed at home by a League One team. And we're just talking about refereeing decisions. Chapeau, Jose.
• This concludes my HOT TAKE

You're not actually serious about the Kightly handball are you? How can anyone believe that's anything but a penalty? Read me as many paragraphs from the rule book as you want....His arm is in a unnatural position and it stops the ball from hitting the target...it's a penalty and a yellow card.

I agree about the Costa Pen appeal....I said at the time he went down very easily....The defender did put hands on him but that's certainly not enough to bring down a man like Costa.

 

[smat]

"Pay attention to the laws of the game when discussing a refereeing decision as much as you want..."

 

[BlueBee]

I'm pretty sure the law states if you push someone below the neck it's a yellow card...above the neck a red card. Doesn't stop Matic deserving a red card.

 

[silkyman]

I don't think the laws as written states anything like that.

 

[thespus]

Why don't we just turn it into ice hockey and just let them have a scrap?

This is an excellent idea. The NHL pisses on the Premier League in terms of excitement (lack of relegation aside, but the draft lottery amends this). Perennial-bully-of-smaller-fish Diego Costa would be made to look a flaky, buttery scone by ice hockey players. Even the smallest players on the ice would have him for breakfast (WITH sugar on Sundays and holidays). He'd quickly learn to stop chirping.

The challenge on Matic deserved a red, but not an added suspension. Jose doing what he does best to magnify this and divert scrutiny from his under-performing side. Matic only has himself to blame for missing Sunday's final. A big loss for Chelsea, too. He's their most irreplaceable player.

 

[BlueBee]

I don't think the laws as written states anything like that.

I wouldn't know I'm not sad enough to read it. Howard Webb said it on a Monday night football a few months back....He should know the rules better than most.

 

[BlueBee]

I've just watched the incident again...it's laughable that some of you are claiming he didn't mean it. The angle of the camera doesn't help...but there's no way on earth he doesn't know what he's doing. He didn't even attempt to get out of it once the ball had gone.

 

[seashell]

Regarding the wording of the rule for the hand ball, surely that is misworded? The last deliberate hand ball I remember seeing was Suarez against Ghana in 2010, and I'm pretty sure I've seen penalties given for hand ball in the league after that.

At least not as crazy as in Spain where it's a pen if the ball is pretty much just near the arm.

 

[Mustard]

Just saw the tackle. Fuck me that was a bad impact. Not sure if it was entirely intentional, it was definitely clumsy and dangerous though. The force on Matic's tibia and fibula must have been huge, he's very, very lucky there. Looking at the video he actually rolls his ankle which absorbs the impact somewhat, had his foot had been firmly rooted to the ground I suspect he'd have been in more trouble.

 

[Pyeman]

Just saw the tackle. Fuck me that was a bad impact. Not sure if it was entirely intentional, it was definitely clumsy and dangerous though.

This pretty much sums up my opinion. I don't think it was intentional, but I accept Barnes' challenge was clumsy and dangerous. I'm not entirely sure of the rules, but I suspect a challenge like that is a red card offence when the potential damage to the recipient is high, as in this case. I don't think I would have any complaints had he gone.

As for the handball, I mentioned earlier in the thread that under the current rules I'm not sure how it can be handball. If you disagree with the rules then take issue with the law-makers, not the referee who simply did his job properly.

 

[Ablur]

I've got no sympathy for Chelsea's claims. It was probably a red card for Barnes although I can see why retrospective action hasn't been taken as he took the ball, and I can why Matic got a red too, but I don't see how Maureen can moan about this in the way that he has when it does tend to even itself out. Costa stamps on Emre Can and Skrtel at Stamford Bridge at 0-0 which doesn't get punished until after the game, Costa also hand balls in the the area at Anfield in the first leg, and Gary Cahill dives to save a shot in the league game at Anfield that helps them to 3 points. If the correct decisions are given, Chelsea leave with 1 point in the league and probably go out of the cup.. As it is, they're 5 points clear and are favourites to win the cup.

We've been quite unlucky this season with decisions, but we had the rub of the green yesterday.