Yes to the correction. I agree that it is odd, so also must assume we did not appeal or were 'advised' not to appeal.

Otherwise, the suspension would be in place? Or do you play on until the appeal heard snd then either have it rescinded or upheld?

On the back of my mind, in the past, an appeal meant you played the next game, if the panel had mot met.

I've watched it a few times, if it was one of their players sent off we'd all be in agreement. Red Card, out of control with studs up..

boatshed bill wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 9:03 pm

I've watched it a few times, if it was one of their players sent off we'd all be in agreement. Red Card, out of control with studs up..

I agree, was a daft tackle, we’ve all done it, I’d have done it but he knew there was no winner

The studs weren't up. The studs went up after his momentum had taken him through the player. And the studs only went up then so he didn't snap his leg getting caught in the turf.

In fact at the point of impact he does what he can to try and minimise the impact.

Nonsense decision, he won the ball.

Bin Ont Turf wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 9:27 pm

The studs weren't up. The studs went up after his momentum had taken him through the player. And the studs only went up then so he didn't snap his leg getting caught in the turf.

In fact at the point of impact he does what he can to try and minimise the impact.

Nonsense decision, he won the ball.

Thank god I'm not mad. I was starting to think I was the only one who saw him point his studs down after taking the ball.

NEVER A RED

Bin Ont Turf wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 9:27 pm

The studs weren't up. The studs went up after his momentum had taken him through the player. And the studs only went up then so he didn't snap his leg getting caught in the turf.

In fact at the point of impact he does what he can to try and minimise the impact.

Nonsense decision, he won the ball.

Like I said, we'd want a red if it was the other way round.
The rules of football are soft as .....

Row Z wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 8:11 pm

No footballer starts a jump for a header with their arms by their side

At no point did I say, or imply, this to be the case

Goobs wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 9:32 pm

Thank god I'm not mad. I was starting to think I was the only one who saw him point his studs down after taking the ball.

NEVER A RED

What if I'm mad though?

But yes, he definitely had his studs down.

Bin Ont Turf wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 9:27 pm

The studs weren't up. The studs went up after his momentum had taken him through the player. And the studs only went up then so he didn't snap his leg getting caught in the turf.

In fact at the point of impact he does what he can to try and minimise the impact.

Nonsense decision, he won the ball.

It was a nonsense of a decision but I believe Lowton will be out for three games now

Surely if they haven't had the appeal he plays, that's what has happened in the past for others isn't it?

boatshed bill wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 9:03 pm

I've watched it a few times, if it was one of their players sent off we'd all be in agreement. Red Card, out of control with studs up..

How's about the shin high follow through on McNeil against Villa a couple of weeks ago that wasn't even a booking?

Bin Ont Turf wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 9:39 pm

What if I'm mad though?
But yes, he definitely had his studs down.

does that make me the March hare

boatshed bill wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 9:03 pm

I've watched it a few times, if it was one of their players sent off we'd all be in agreement. Red Card, out of control with studs up..

Unfortunately your attempt to read my mind has failed. You're fully entitled to your own opinion, but it's usually unwise to be so convinced you're right that no-one else can have a different opinion.

dsr wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 10:57 pm

Unfortunately your attempt to read my mind has failed. You're fully entitled to your own opinion, but it's usually unwise to be so convinced you're right that no-one else can have a different opinion.

You can have whatever opinion you want.
It's still a red card.
Sometimes one just has to accept things that don't suit.
Like I said, the rules now are shite.

boatshed bill wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 11:17 pm

You can have whatever opinion you want.
It's still a red card.
Sometimes one just has to accept things that don't suit.
Like I said, the rules now are [deleted].

Specifically, when you say that I would be shouting for a red card for any opponent who does that, you're plain wrong. I don't disagree that the rules are rubbish.

dsr wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 11:23 pm

Specifically, when you say that I would be shouting for a red card for any opponent who does that, you're plain wrong. I don't disagree that the rules are rubbish.

Whatever,
let's just hope for a win tomorrow.

Obvious to me this was reckless but not violent or dangerous. Yellow card. Foot was low, studs pointed down (hence why he trod on the guys foot in a sense). If this were a City player, the appeal would now be over and done with, and won. I have no doubts.

The other way to look at this - which is more dangerous, Lowton’s foul, or the one in the Mersey derby when Richarlison put his studs on the guys leg then (presumably deliberately) pushed his studs in hard? We may recall - that incident that was unpunished.

Anyone that’s played football at any level will know that’s never even remotely a red.

PremierLeagueClass wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 11:34 pm

Anyone that’s played football at any level will know that’s never even remotely a red.

TBH it wouldn't have been a foul when I played.

PremierLeagueClass wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 11:34 pm

Anyone that’s played football at any level will know that’s never even remotely a red.

Absolute prime example here. Can anybody help me? Is it psychology?
I.e where there is a perceived authority....therefore if you think differently....you must be wrong......because you are thinking differently to the expert. So the person stating it wins the argument....because you back down thinking the expert must know best.

What is this method called?....please help me.

Let me try this.

I used to play football professionally for Carlisle Utd. Lowton deliberately endangered his opponent, so therefore it is without doubt a red card. Even if you haven't played football professionally like me, but played it at some lower level, surely you can see it was dangerous and must therefore be a red card.

Grrr. What is this technique called?

2 Bee Holed wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 12:15 am

Absolute prime example here. Can anybody help me? Is it psychology?
I.e where there is a perceived authority....therefore if you think differently....you must be wrong......because you are thinking differently to the expert. So the person stating it wins the argument....because you back down thinking the expert must know best.

What is this method called?....please help me.

Let me try this.

I used to play football professionally for Carlisle Utd. Lowton deliberately endangered his opponent, so therefore it is without doubt a red card. Even if you haven't played football professionally like me, but played it at some lower level, surely you can see it was dangerous and must therefore be a red card.

Grrr. What is this technique called?

I can't be certain but it sounds very much like gobbledegook?

I think it was a yellow card .

Cheshireclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 12:19 am

I can't be certain but it sounds very much like gobbledegook?

Nope. There is a definite name for this technique. Try it, it's surprising how often it works.

2 Bee Holed wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 12:15 am

Absolute prime example here. Can anybody help me? Is it psychology?
I.e where there is a perceived authority....therefore if you think differently....you must be wrong......because you are thinking differently to the expert. So the person stating it wins the argument....because you back down thinking the expert must know best.

What is this method called?....please help me.

Let me try this.

I used to play football professionally for Carlisle Utd. Lowton deliberately endangered his opponent, so therefore it is without doubt a red card. Even if you haven't played football professionally like me, but played it at some lower level, surely you can see it was dangerous and must therefore be a red card.

Grrr. What is this technique called?

I don't like picking on people. But, you know. This guy is playing for carlisle or sumthin I dunno you guys, could be one of them fellas that always has yer back at Miwwwalll you know.

distortiondave wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 12:28 am

I don't like picking on people. But, you know. This guy is playing for carlisle or sumthin I dunno you guys, could be one of them fellas that always has yer back at Miwwwalll you know.

Don't pick on me then.
I have never played for Carlisle. It was just an example of somebody pretending to be an expert......so that everyone agrees with them and they therefore win the argument.

Have you got your money back yet?

2 Bee Holed wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 12:44 am

Don't pick on me then.
I have never played for Carlisle. It was just an example of somebody pretending to be an expert......so that everyone agrees with them and they therefore win the argument.

Have you got your money back yet?

2 Bee Holed wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 12:44 am

Have you got your money back yet?

Have I heck!

2 Bee Holed wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 12:15 am

Absolute prime example here. Can anybody help me? Is it psychology?
I.e where there is a perceived authority....therefore if you think differently....you must be wrong......because you are thinking differently to the expert. So the person stating it wins the argument....because you back down thinking the expert must know best.

What is this method called?....please help me.

Let me try this.

I used to play football professionally for Carlisle Utd. Lowton deliberately endangered his opponent, so therefore it is without doubt a red card. Even if you haven't played football professionally like me, but played it at some lower level, surely you can see it was dangerous and must therefore be a red card.

Grrr. What is this technique called?

Appeal to authority, a variation of an ad hominem as positive debate rather than negative debate. As logical fallacies go its less aggravating than direct ad hominem attacks but craftier as expertise can (and should) be used to provide further information and context. But the fallacy is using the authority alone without actually demonstrating the added evidence of it.

As for the topic at hand, I don't think it's ever a red card, but I probably would say that as a Burnley fan. But can only think what you think.

2 Bee Holed wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 12:15 am

Absolute prime example here. Can anybody help me? Is it psychology?
I.e where there is a perceived authority....therefore if you think differently....you must be wrong......because you are thinking differently to the expert. So the person stating it wins the argument....because you back down thinking the expert must know best.

What is this method called?....please help me.

Let me try this.

I used to play football professionally for Carlisle Utd. Lowton deliberately endangered his opponent, so therefore it is without doubt a red card. Even if you haven't played football professionally like me, but played it at some lower level, surely you can see it was dangerous and must therefore be a red card.

Grrr. What is this technique called?

Argument from authority. Sometimes called appeal to authority. It's a form of sophistry. Rather than substantiate a claim by providing evidence or justification for what is affirmed, an appeal to authority tricks an uncritical listener into believing it to true by causing them to doubt themselves and trust in a so-called "authority". An uncritical listener might then accept the claim on the basis that it is held by an authority, but technically speaking the claim has not been proven. All that has happened is a clever bit of language has been used by one person to bend another person to their will.

Sorry, spt. Missed your post there. I've basically repeated you. Soz!

Spiral wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 2:02 am

Sorry, spt. Missed your post there. I've basically repeated you. Soz!

Why thank you and spt both. I knew it was a well known technique.

I am sure sales people are trained in a similar technique.
Eg

"95% of people who buy these hearing aids do so because they want to be able to hear their grandchildren."

By implication therefore if you don't buy the aids you don't want to hear your grandkids.
Mind you, probably not the best example considering some of the folk on here.

PremierLeagueClass wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 11:34 pm

Anyone that’s played football at any level will know that’s never even remotely a red.

Except Tierney, Brooks and the appeals panel.

so is the appeal Monday?

Appeal failed

it's another staggering decision

Why am I not surprised, of course the panel were going to back Tierney he's one of their own.

Scumbags

IanMcL wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 2:43 pm

Scumbags

For once, we are in agreement, Ian!

Tricky Trevor wrote: ↑

Sun May 22, 2022 1:38 pm

so is the appeal Monday?

Appeal had to be held prior to yesterday's games and I posted further up the thread that it had failed and Lowton would be suspended for yesterday.

The three person panel who upheld the decision were Gary Mabbutt, Stuart Ripley and former England player Faye White.

What a joke!

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Mon May 23, 2022 3:11 pm

Appeal had to be held prior to yesterday's games and I posted further up the thread that it had failed and Lowton would be suspended for yesterday.

The three person panel who upheld the decision were Gary Mabbutt, Stuart Ripley and former England player Faye White.

don't know anything about when Faye White reitred but there isn't a cat in hells chance it would have been a free-kick never mind a red card when Mabbutt and Ripley were playing

So he's banned for the first three games next season?

gawthorpe_view wrote: ↑

Mon May 23, 2022 3:30 pm

So he's banned for the first three games next season?

First two I would guess, as he's already served one of them yesterday.

jedi_master wrote: ↑

Mon May 23, 2022 3:31 pm

First two I would guess, as he's already served one of them yesterday.

If they declined the appeal then have they considered it a frivolous appeal which usually results in an additional game?

If not then I’m wondering what the reason is for them not overturning it was

gawthorpe_view wrote: ↑

Mon May 23, 2022 3:30 pm

So he's banned for the first three games next season?

No, three match ban, yesterday and first two games of next season.

wilks_bfc wrote: ↑

Mon May 23, 2022 3:48 pm

If they declined the appeal then have they considered it a frivolous appeal which usually results in an additional game?

If not then I’m wondering what the reason is for them not overturning it was

The reason for them not overturning it is that it was viewed by VAR and they don’t want to be seen to be going against a decision that was made in this way.

It should have been overturned but it’s a save face decision.

Giving the benefit of any doubt, no matter how small, to the referee.

wilks_bfc wrote: ↑

Mon May 23, 2022 3:48 pm

If they declined the appeal then have they considered it a frivolous appeal which usually results in an additional game?

If not then I’m wondering what the reason is for them not overturning it was

I think a frivolous appeal is "any referee would have sent him off", whereas a non-frivolous one is "it could have gone either way". A successful appeal is only when they couldn't see any reason why it would be a red card, and they shouldn't happen with VAR available.

How are the panel chosen I wonder? If it had been shearer, wright and lineker they would have probably overturned it.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Mon May 23, 2022 3:11 pm

The three person panel who upheld the decision were Gary Mabbutt, Stuart Ripley and former England player Faye White.

I suspect the question isn't "Do you think this was a red card?", but more "within the narrow parameters you have been given, are you 2 billion % sure it wasn't absolutely not a red card? And remember, we haven't yet decided whether or not to ask you back!!"


What a joke