by ferrarilover » 27 Aug 2012, 22:05
Jesus, how far behind are the FA? LRT suspended for three Torquay United first team matches for a sending off in February (or words to that effect). So far behind, I'm not sure where to begin.
As to the OP, Scotty B's excellent research is absolutely accurate. It's a common misconception that a red card is three matches. In fact, surprisingly few are. If I had my way, I would invoke a ruling based upon the nature of the offence and the time it was committed. Let's say player commits a 'professional foul', (let's use Downer's as an example). Not dangerous in any way, not the type of offence for which any real punishment would be deserved, but a sending off needs to be awarded to prevent that type of offence too common. If the offence is committed in the first minute of a match, then the player is effectively banned for two matches (the one in which he commits the offence plus his one match ban). Equally, the team is forced to play the whole match with 10 men, which is unfair and unbalanced upon the league table and consequently unfair on all the other teams in that division. The players who play in that match are likely to have to work much harder and me more knackered. The list of things which are affected goes on and on.
If a guy commits the same offence in the 95th minute, none of these things are a factor and the ban is effectively half as long for the sake of committing an identical offence. One could argue that committing the offence in the final minute is more serious than committing the offence in the first minute, precisely because the "benefiting" team have the man advantage for less time.
Perhaps if the player was dismissed before the 61st minute, then no ban could be applied? It's not a perfect system, but it might be somewhat more fair than what we have now. That or a sin bin, whereby the referee is permitted to dismiss a player for anything from 15 minutes to the remainder of the match, then allow the FA to make the decision on further punishment on a case by case basis.
It's quite labour intensive, but then, given the time the FA spend on enforcing and creating pointless rules (did anyone else see the "if you have blue socks, you must have blue sock tape" farce in the Man City v Southampton game?), I don't think they'll have trouble finding manpower to redirect.
Sorry, was that a bit much?
Matt.
Jesus, how far behind are the FA? LRT suspended for three Torquay United first team matches for a sending off in February (or words to that effect). So far behind, I'm not sure where to begin.
As to the OP, Scotty B's excellent research is absolutely accurate. It's a common misconception that a red card is three matches. In fact, surprisingly few are. If I had my way, I would invoke a ruling based upon the nature of the offence and the time it was committed. Let's say player commits a 'professional foul', (let's use Downer's as an example). Not dangerous in any way, not the type of offence for which any real punishment would be deserved, but a sending off needs to be awarded to prevent that type of offence too common. If the offence is committed in the first minute of a match, then the player is effectively banned for two matches (the one in which he commits the offence plus his one match ban). Equally, the team is forced to play the whole match with 10 men, which is unfair and unbalanced upon the league table and consequently unfair on all the other teams in that division. The players who play in that match are likely to have to work much harder and me more knackered. The list of things which are affected goes on and on.
If a guy commits the same offence in the 95th minute, none of these things are a factor and the ban is effectively half as long for the sake of committing an identical offence. One could argue that committing the offence in the final minute is more serious than committing the offence in the first minute, precisely because the "benefiting" team have the man advantage for less time.
Perhaps if the player was dismissed before the 61st minute, then no ban could be applied? It's not a perfect system, but it might be somewhat more fair than what we have now. That or a sin bin, whereby the referee is permitted to dismiss a player for anything from 15 minutes to the remainder of the match, then allow the FA to make the decision on further punishment on a case by case basis.
It's quite labour intensive, but then, given the time the FA spend on enforcing and creating pointless rules (did anyone else see the "if you have blue socks, you must have blue sock tape" farce in the Man City v Southampton game?), I don't think they'll have trouble finding manpower to redirect.
Sorry, was that a bit much?
Matt.
