irons_4_ever Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Not happy how can it fail the appeal i have never had a rec card resended:thdn: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
irons_4_ever Posted March 8, 2009 Author Share Posted March 8, 2009 Nobody think this is weird Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter-evo Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Maybe the FA wants to back the referees. I really don't understand that last sentence in the screenshot, always confuses me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EthanM Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Maybe the FA wants to back the referees. I agree. What is really weird is how you got Casillas to play for West Ham. And him being worth 77m. How much did you splurge on him? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavenagh Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Nobody think this is weird No. Why did he get the red card? Without that information all we have to go from is the inconclusive sentence 'replays may have got the decision wrong'. So if replays are not definitive, then it's more than possible that the red card was justified. And unless it is absolutely, certainly, conclusively incorrectly given, a red card will always stand. Just as in real life. Peter-evo:I really don't understand that last sentence in the screenshot, always confuses me. Which confuses you? The final sentence on the first screen shot is saying that video replays don't really prove one way or another. As newspapers etc. have a tendency to side against referees, the wording is sympathetic to the manager. The final sentence of the second screen shot is simply saying that there was no evidence to suggest that the decision was incorrect so the card and suspension stands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojby Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 I never bother appealing cards as it is not worth it - never ever had one recinded so I do not bother wasting my time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNITED!!!!! Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 If the replays are not definitive then how can the FA decide whether or not to remain silent? Surely if the FA are silent over your criticism then the decision must have been wrong. If not, what hope do we have in the in game "replays" are getting the decision wrong. Has anybody ever had a red card rescinded? Is it even a feature in the game? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavenagh Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Because the benefit of the doubt goes towards the referee, who is there in the middle of the action, who has the job of making those decisions. Replays are often inconclusive, no matter how many cameras catch the action. And occasionally it is a subjective call where it's the referees judgement. Red Cards can be rescinded. But don't use a media message to decide if you should. Look at the incident and the match report. Just because the FA are silent doesn't mean that an absolutely wrong decision has been made. It means that there isn't substantive evidence either way, so they're going to back the people employed to make the judgement calls. If there was conclusive evidence then you'll get fined or the card will get rescinded. A lot of calls made by officials are based on their judgement of the situation, and one of the most important means of keeping discipline during a game is the concept that the referees word is final. So the FA are going to maintain that stance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spurz123 Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 I think I saw a screenie of it ages ago, but it is extramly rare. The decision must be 100% conclusivly outrageous and then will need a whole truckload of luck on the side. It should happen at the same ratio as real life, but it doesn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum94 Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 i have allways appealed for a red card never got it recined on fm2009. I gues what the last sentences "that the replay may show that they could of got it wrong" meaning that some/some views or part of the rplay suggest that they could of got it wrong but because we cant see the replay ot have an actual human to judge it instead of an AI means that the FA are allways going 2 back the ref Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanGLiverpool Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 The entire sentence in the appeal message confuses me, it makes no sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavenagh Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 The entire sentence in the appeal message confuses me, it makes no sense. What about it doesn't make sense? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
irons_4_ever Posted March 8, 2009 Author Share Posted March 8, 2009 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giantjames Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 All I have to say as a Watford fan (still angry) is Reading phantom-goal, I'm sure you all know what I mean.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcwestham1478 Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 All I have to say as a Watford fan (still angry) is Reading phantom-goal, I'm sure you all know what I mean.... Watford are rubbish so that goal means nothing you aint going up couldnt handle the prem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giantjames Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Watford are rubbish so that goal means nothing you aint going up couldnt handle the prem. Ironic that this comment comes from a west ham fan when we knocked them out of the Carling Cup a few short months ago lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcwestham1478 Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 You gained nothing outa it mate. We are in the prem looking good and your in the championship doing nothing. I think its nice how lil clubs like yours hangs on to them results. Bless ya. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevicus Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Hey hey hey, this is not the place for footy put downs, should you wish to continue, i would suggest the footy forum. Even better, talk to each other on msn and keep it private. Back on topic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcwestham1478 Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 HA ha sorry man. But i think the sendings off on fm is stupid when it aint a sending off but yet you never get the suspension lifted unrealistic part of the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caramel Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 If Casillas handled the ball outside of the box then thats a definite red card Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Wakeford Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Yes, while it may be described as "harsh," it is an offence that the player can be sent off for. The FA are right to backup the referee in this case. They probably didn't punish you because of the nature of the offence - depending on the situation a lot of people feel this is a yellow, although strictly speaking it should be a red. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.