Mings 5 Match Ban?

[Kyle Hatch]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39210644

Thoughts?

Is an elbow directed at the head with force, not as bad as a stamp to the head? Was it a delibrate stamp? Is it FA bias against bournamouth/for United?

Personally (queue united bias) i think they got this one correct. Mings has a definate look down and stamps onto Ibra head, the only mistake he makes is brushing instead of getting better contact. The retaliation is cowardly from Ibra. Footballer know the authorities will see these things and deal with them accordingly (most of the time) his revenge would of been better spent scoring.

I guess in reality if the referee had been stronger in the inital off the ball scuffle and dealt with it then, there may of been no afters. Additional in the time mings was down and the ref waved around a bit, a video replay could of happened and the right decision at the time could of happened.

In that case, would you want the FA to step in an extend mings ban (from 3 to 5), or would you leave it in the hands of the ref, a straight red, 3 games, end of?

Curious to replies.

 

[Nilsson]

Serves them right for launching such an outrageously frivolous appeal. Just hold your hands up and take your punishment like a man for crying out loud.

 

[Pagnell]

No way of knowing for sure if it was deliberate, unlike the elbow from Zlatan, only Mings knows. The fact he looked down before leaping doesn't categorically rule out an accident. However, it appears the authorities didn't believe it was an accident.

 

[Benji]

I think Mings jumped high and Ibrahimovic jumped into his foot.

 

[SALTIRE]

Shameful from the FA for a pure accident. Bunch of bottlers the lot of them.

 

[hodge]

They have to have been 100% sure Mings intended it, which is near impossible as only Mings knows for certain whether he meant it, if the incident had been the other way round would it still have been 5 games? I'm not so sure.

 

[AFCB_Mark]

I'd be absolutely fascinated to know if in some parallel world, Ibra had done the 'stamp' on Mings and Mings had done the elbow to Ibra, if Ibra would have got 5 games for it.

Of course we at AFCB point out the suspected attempt at a stamp by Ibra just prior, but that seems to be quietly forgotten.

Let's face it: Mings was all over Zlatan at every set piece, Zlatan threw Mings to the ground, we had the stamp, the elbow, Zlatan's constant shouting at the ref, the ridiculous incident with Surman, all manor of stuff throughout the game from the pair of them. Both should have been sent off. Both players went at each other the whole time, getting more and more extreme as the referee refused to get a handle on the situation. Zlatan thinks he's the big I am and pushes the boundaries when he can get away with it. Mings is a young defender just breaking into the side desperate to continue impressing for more starts and he took it too far.

To me, a common sense approach would have been to tell both to bugger off for a 3 game ban to calm down, replicating a straight red. Equal punishment for both being silly billies throughout the game.

Once you start getting into the can of worms to scrutinise the Mings incident, judging just how much intent there was, how much he actually caught Zlatan or not, what direction he was running in and where else could he have put his boot down etc etc to me it seems virtually impossible to say. Only the two of them will know exactly how much intent there was in their actions. And both after the game made little fuss (perhaps trying to get themselves off the hook granted)

The reason we appealed by the way, was because of the FA statement prior to the review, in which the FA had already decided to warranted an extended ban. That we felt was out of order, so we wanted the opportunity to argue that point. Hence the appeal.

 

[Nilsson]

The reason we appealed by the way, was because of the FA statement prior to the review, in which the FA had already decided to warranted an extended ban. That we felt was out of order, so we wanted the opportunity to argue that point. Hence the appeal.

Bournemouth should count themselves lucky that it wasn't extended further then. Mings was always going to get a longer ban, jumping on a face with studs was simply taking things too far. Here's hoping he learns from this incident.

 

[Pagnell]

Bournemouth should count themselves lucky that it wasn't extended further then. Mings was always going to get a longer ban, jumping on a face with studs was simply taking things too far. Here's hoping he learns from this incident.

Manchester United fan deciding it was absolutely 100% deliberate despite no way of knowing for sure shocker.

 

[Nilsson]

Manchester United fan deciding it was absolutely 100% deliberate despite no way of knowing for sure shocker.

Mings being banned does nothing to help Man Utd. If anything it hurts us as Liverpool is one of the games he's going to miss. But it was obviously deliberate imo and I'm pleased the powers that be agree.

 

[sl1k]

Oh come on.

The Mings stamp for wreckless at best, attempted GBH at worst. It's not like he jumped and caught a limb, it was a man's head ffs [!!] - it's not that difficult to avoid.

 

[Pagnell]

It could have been deliberate, but the point is that there is no way of knowing for sure unless your name is Mings and you play for Bournemouth. I've seen the incident at least ten times and can't say he absolutely meant to stamp on his head, it could have been a misjudgement in his leap. Still, it's great you Manchester United fans are so certain about it.

And the authorities believing it was deliberate doesn't mean it was. Just saying.

 

[sl1k]

My point was that even without intent, it's still incredibly wreckless.

For example; if someone goes in a tackle with the 100% intention of getting the ball, but ends up totally taking the other guy out. Does the intent even matter anymore? Where do you draw the line?

Obviously in this case Zlatan got up. But it could have been very different.

 

[AFCB_Mark]

Bournemouth should count themselves lucky that it wasn't extended further then. Mings was always going to get a longer ban, jumping on a face with studs was simply taking things too far. Here's hoping he learns from this incident.

Regarding the reason to appeal: You've missed the point.

The whole idea of the review panel is to review the incident, establish 'guilt' (or not) and assign a punishment as appropriate. The FA publicly coming out before their review panel had sat down and the review taken place, and announcing that the FA expected an extended ban, simply prejudices the whole process. What's the point in having a review panel? That's the point we wanted to argue.

If the panel come to the unanimous view on their own that Mings intended it, then fair enough. Thats their job. But 'the FA' (an individual unknown) already decided that for them. Transparency?

It probably didn't do us any good in terms of getting Mings a lighter punishment, but the point of principle needed to be made. So we had to appeal to make that argument. .

 

[G-Dragon]

FA helping united every step but they are still 6th [emoji23]

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

 

[JaseTheVillain]

Just to add my two pence, even though we're not up here any more, it's the same disciplinary board...

Is a light chest bump on the linesman worse than stamping on a fellow professional's head, or elbowing a fellow professional deliberately?

Just curious, because that incident got Bacuna a 6 game ban.

The inconsistencies in the FA's decisions are unreal, let's be honest.

 

[PDS]

3 would have been fair - I, and anyone else, don't know the intent, from some angles it looks pure accident, from others it looks like he has a look down to make sure he catches him. Either way it's dangerous play.

No matter the ludicrous and biased assumptions of the United fan on here; it's hard to make an argument that Mings deserved a longer ban than Zlatan - especially as Ibrahimovic was lucky to be on the pitch before the incident occured.

 

[DontBringBertie]

Just to add my two pence, even though we're not up here any more, it's the same disciplinary board...

Is a light chest bump on the linesman worse than stamping on a fellow professional's head, or elbowing a fellow professional deliberately?

Just curious, because that incident got Bacuna a 6 game ban.

The inconsistencies in the FA's decisions are unreal, let's be honest.

I would say anything to the officials is a lot worse. The FA have to be seen to take a heavy stance on any physical contact with a ref/linesman. They've always handed out heavy punishment for that sort of stuff (Di Canio, Prutton etc) so hardly inconsistent from that point of view.

Mings and Zlatan should have got exactly the same ban. Both violent conduct – how is smashing your elbow in to someone’s face worse than a boot on the head?

I also enjoyed how Zlatan’s comments that “he jumped in to my elbow” were seen as HILARIOUS by a large section. Even Lineker laughing on MOTD. When did everything Zlatan say suddenly make him an ABSOULTE LEGEND? The guy’s a tool, has a shit ponytail and tries way too hard come across as rent a quote gimp.

 

[Pagnell]

I also enjoyed how Zlatan’s comments that “he jumped in to my elbow” were seen as HILARIOUS by a large section. Even Lineker laughing on MOTD. When did everything Zlatan say suddenly make him an ABSOULTE LEGEND? The guy’s a tool, has a shit ponytail and tries way too hard come across as rent a quote gimp.

I laughed.

 

[JaseTheVillain]

I would say anything to the officials is a lot worse. The FA have to be seen to take a heavy stance on any physical contact with a ref/linesman. They've always handed out heavy punishment for that sort of stuff (Di Canio, Prutton etc) so hardly inconsistent from that point of view.

Wenger got 4.

 

[DontBringBertie]

Wenger got 4.

Yeah but he manages a top 4 team so it doesn't matter. The same way Fergie somehow managed to be matey with referees (to the extent Clattenberg even texted him after the Mikel incident and asked him to put out a word to the press saying "CLATTS would never do something like that"), whilst screaming in their faces and criticising them at every opportunity.

 

[hodge]

Waiting for Rojo's 5 match ban....

 

[silkyman]

You'll be waiting a while. Standard 'the officials saw it so we can't act' defence.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

Utterly farcical that Rojo's seemingly not facing any further action. How can you stamp, quite deliberately, on a player lying on the ground, and face no further censure?

 

[Benji]

A lot of people are getting up in arms about Rojo getting away with a stamp where Mings didn't, but there is a perfectly good reason for it.
I can totally understand why, on the face of it, it seems like they should both be punishable by a lengthy ban. Maybe not of the same length, but some kind of ban would usually be expected for both situations since they appear to be quite similar. The thing is though, they aren't exactly the same. No two situations in football are.
In football, a lot of things depend on the context of the match or the specific duel. And I think it is important to note the different contexts of these two situations. In the first case, Mings has stamped on Ibrahimovic. Whether it is intentional or not, it is an opposition player stamping on Manchester United player. That is what happened.
In the game on monday, it was a Manchester United player stamping on an opposition player.

 

[Pagnell]

I see what you did there. It was good.

 

[AFCB_Mark]

We could not have asked for a more apt and timely example to show up how poor the current FA disciplinary process is.

Odd that the gang of ex United players turned pundits have been very quiet on this one after making such a song and dance about Mings.

 

[Nilsson]

 

[Super_horns]

I see they have been charged with surrounding the officials - but I thought that was a yellow card on the pitch now?

Or has that rule just been discarded like most dissent ones seem to be.