Balotelli not punished further for his tackle on song.
The ref says it was ok.
Atkinson what a dick.
Balotelli not punished further for his tackle on song.
The ref says it was ok.
Atkinson what a dick.
Wow, thats some new levels of douche baggery from Atkinson!
He didn't say 'it was ok', Charlie.
He said he saw the incident. That's all he said. But apparently, for some retarded reason, it doesn't matter how much he saw. i.e. he might not have seen much of it at all but action can't be taken because he didn't miss all of it. Whatever 'all of it' is.
"Where at least one of the officials has seen the coming together of players retrospective action is not taken, regardless of whether they have seen the full extent of the challenge.
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/st...llenge?cc=5739
It's all very, very stupid.
So Atkinson saw it and deemed it a fair challenge?
Wtf?
Someone should do that to his face.
As for the FA,
By saying he saw it, he is in other words saying it was an Ok challenge.Originally Posted by Syn
He didn't say 'it was ok', Charlie.
He said he saw the incident. That's all he said. But apparently, for some retarded reason, it doesn't matter how much he saw. i.e. he might not have seen much of it at all but action can't be taken because he didn't miss all of it. Whatever 'all of it' is.
It's all very, very stupid. [/FONT][/COLOR]
I'm sure, in hindsight, he can't claim it was an ok challenge. He is probably saying he saw a bit of it but his view was also obstructed that prevented him from seeing all of it. So by the rules of the FA, retrospective action can't be taken because he didn't miss the challenge in its entirety. It's a ridiculous rule.
IMO he saw it and just bottled it. Even if he didn't see it, some other official must've seen it. They just didn't want to make a big call.
From the FA all the way up to FIFA the whole premise is that the referee is NEVER wrong and admitting he may have been shows weakness so it
Must.
Not.
Happen.
Utter balls. I'd have far more time for the whole system of the ref admitted he saw it but, having seen a replay, realised he called it wrong and that retrospective punishment is appropriate. The way it is right now is completely nonsensical. It doesn't matter how crass or clearly wrong a decision is, if the ref 'saw' it that's that and his decision at the time was right.
I guess from their point of view, they would say that if we start correcting bad decisions after the game, where does it end? The team on the receiving end of the decision would say 'what about some other challenge in the 73rd minute' or 'how about correcting the penalty decision we were supposed to get' etc.From the FA all the way up to FIFA the whole premise is that the referee is NEVER wrong and admitting he may have been shows weakness so it
Must.
Not.
Happen.
Utter balls. I'd have far more time for the whole system of the ref admitted he saw it but, having seen a replay, realised he called it wrong and that retrospective punishment is appropriate. The way it is right now is completely nonsensical. It doesn't matter how crass or clearly wrong a decision is, if the ref 'saw' it that's that and his decision at the time was right.
Setting up a transparent points record for referees and a 'challengers' system is the way forward IMO.
Not really. It is not as if the intention is to change the result of games, which would be silly. But if someone has dived, kicked the shit out of someone, etc. then even if the ref made an on-the-spot decision at the time with what he saw - which has to happen to keep the flow of the game - it is not undermining the ref if, with the help of different camera angles and the ability to analyse incidents, we should not punish violent or cheating cunts after the event rather than let them get away scot free. In the long run, I reckon it would improve the game by reducing diving and taking a few more thugs off the pitch.
Fair point.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote