| Hills Comments After Game 22:43 - Aug 10 with 12727 views | CoventryDale |
Keith Hill Was Livid After The Red Card But Even Though The Referee And The 1 Nil Lose He Said He Was Happy With The Possession. |  |
| |  |
| Hills Comments After Game on 19:57 - Aug 11 with 4288 views | ChaffRAFC |
I wasn't at the game yesterday but have seen the replay on the Football League show and the incident is exactly the same as Nani's challenge against Real Madrid last season. There's no way the Cavanagh incident, or Nani's , should be a red card and I think it boils down to referees who have never played the game, misinterpreting what is a deliberate act of dangerous play and what is a genuine attempt to get to the football. There's zero point in appealing because we'll get nothing from it.
That said, I remember a few people on here were quick to shoot me down when I complained that Nani was sent off.
It seemed like a referee has ruined what should have been a good battle between two teams looking to be towards the top of the table with over 83 minutes of the game left.
Only thing we can do is put it in the rearview mirror and concentrate on taking on the favourites for the league on Saturday without our captain. |  |
| If I hadn't seen such riches, I could live with being poor |
| |
| Hills Comments After Game on 20:00 - Aug 11 with 4277 views | macro |
Probably didn't help cav being involved in the early challenge prior to the off |  | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 20:16 - Aug 11 with 4251 views | Ralphs12 |
Weird, I'd typed out a reply and it was blank when I'd sent it, odd.
Anyway, I think its a bit irrelevant if Cav was or wasn't involved in an earlier incident, which again didnt seem all that bad. To go from that which he didnt get booked for and I dont remember the ref talking to him about it either, to then be sent off would suggest the ref didnt think about the earlier tackle. [Post edited 11 Aug 2013 20:56]
|  | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 22:14 - Aug 11 with 4122 views | wmgunit |
| Hills Comments After Game on 18:22 - Aug 11 by AtThePeake |
Would love to hear the referees reasoning for the red card then. Cav had absolutely no idea the player was there, how can he have used excessive force? |
I don't think not knowing the player was there precludes Cav from using excessive force.
In any case, the law is far too ambiguous to win an appeal against. I think Chaff has it right in that referees are misinterpreting the purpose of a vague law. This leads to sendings off when boot makes contact with an opposition player's upper body, irrespective of context. [Post edited 11 Aug 2013 22:31]
|  | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 10:55 - Aug 12 with 3981 views | Ralphs12 |
There is more of a follow through on that incident. After the coming together you can see him put even more force into it, with cav he sticks his leg out to control the ball, and there player makes the most of it. Soft git. | | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 13:15 - Aug 12 with 3907 views | ColDale |
We have appealed against the sending off
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 13:22 - Aug 12 with 3893 views | ChaffRAFC |
| Hills Comments After Game on 13:15 - Aug 12 by ColDale |
We have appealed against the sending off
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Very surprised by this | |
| If I hadn't seen such riches, I could live with being poor |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Hills Comments After Game on 13:31 - Aug 12 with 3868 views | sandylaner1 |
if rejected, will he get an extra game ban or will the 3 game ban just be upheld |  | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 13:35 - Aug 12 with 3861 views | ColDale |
the extra game ban comes if they think the ban is frivolous. We're not the sort of club who appeals for the sake of it, so I reckon our past record should count in our favour in the ban not being extended.
This post has been edited by an administrator | | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 13:36 - Aug 12 with 3856 views | SalwaDale |
| Hills Comments After Game on 13:35 - Aug 12 by ColDale |
the extra game ban comes if they think the ban is frivolous. We're not the sort of club who appeals for the sake of it, so I reckon our past record should count in our favour in the ban not being extended.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Agree with that but I'd be stunned if it is overturned. We can but hope though. |  |
| |
| Hills Comments After Game on 14:32 - Aug 12 with 3787 views | TVOS1907 |
| Hills Comments After Game on 13:35 - Aug 12 by ColDale |
the extra game ban comes if they think the ban is frivolous. We're not the sort of club who appeals for the sake of it, so I reckon our past record should count in our favour in the ban not being extended.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
But each appeal should be taken on its own merits.
We must have money to burn this week. |  |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Hills Comments After Game on 14:43 - Aug 12 with 3776 views | ColDale |
the appeal will be on its own merits. What is then subsequently judged is whether the appeal is for genuine reasons. The extra game ban is in place to prevent clubs appealing everything simply for the sake of it., and ensures that they think it through before doing so. You could imagine Coleman sticking an appeal in every time simply because we had no discipline issues. | | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 14:45 - Aug 12 with 3774 views | TVOS1907 |
| Hills Comments After Game on 14:43 - Aug 12 by ColDale |
the appeal will be on its own merits. What is then subsequently judged is whether the appeal is for genuine reasons. The extra game ban is in place to prevent clubs appealing everything simply for the sake of it., and ensures that they think it through before doing so. You could imagine Coleman sticking an appeal in every time simply because we had no discipline issues. |
I meant the bit about our previous appeals record shouldn't - and probably won't - be relevant. | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Hills Comments After Game on 15:13 - Aug 12 with 3730 views | SteTsGoldenBoot |
Having only seen it on TV it didnt look like a straight red, but i'd be amazed if it was overturned.
Its great that our club have backed our captain though. |  |
| Everything thats been, has past. The answers in the looking glass! |
| |
| Hills Comments After Game on 23:25 - Aug 12 with 3496 views | boromat |
Be interesting to see the result of the appeal. I think the ref being new to the League will have a bearing. Fingers crossed!!! The challenge definitely didn't warrant 6 minutes less than a 4 match ban! It was reckless at most which is a yellow. | |
| |
| Hills Comments After Game on 23:27 - Aug 12 with 3494 views | boromat |
Oh just out of interest does anyone think the new ref might have looked up our disciplinary record from last year before the game to give himself a heads up on what to expect?
Just thinking aloud. | |
| |
| Hills Comments After Game on 23:41 - Aug 12 with 3482 views | sandylaner23 |
Colin Garlick explains the decision on his interview on daleplayer.
He has the rule book out and Basically states that:
Careless challenge = foul free kick punishment
Reckless challenge = foul, free kick, yellow card
Excessive force = straight red.
States that the club feels that Cavs challenge was reckless at worst warrenting yellow card not red
Hopes common sense will prevail.
Says Cav maybe should have been more aware of the players around him, but for me he's only got eyes for the ball.
After the Perkins decision in 08 I don't have much faith in the disciplinary committee |  | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 23:56 - Aug 12 with 3469 views | KenBoon |
I'd love for the appeal to be successful, if only to bust the myth that it's a straight Red card. It reminds me of when Referee's would always send off Goalkeepers for handling outside the area when the Laws clearly stated they needed to be preventing a clear goalscoring opportunity.
...of course it'll fail. Maybe we should have appealed to the FA of Wales.
On the Nani comparison. I notice that UEFA only banned him for 1 game. That's about as much confirmation that you'll ever get from UEFA that a referee was wrong as the correct punishment would be a three game ban. |  | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 08:37 - Aug 13 with 3360 views | fermin |
More recently there was the Phil Edwards appeal, where, if I remember correctly, the video evidence contradicted what the referee said happened. That was rejected very quickly so I would be surprised if this one was overturned. |  | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 11:30 - Aug 13 with 3286 views | TVOS1907 |
| Hills Comments After Game on 08:37 - Aug 13 by fermin |
More recently there was the Phil Edwards appeal, where, if I remember correctly, the video evidence contradicted what the referee said happened. That was rejected very quickly so I would be surprised if this one was overturned. |
Do you mean McIntyre? | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Hills Comments After Game on 13:38 - Aug 13 with 3210 views | Yorkshire_Dale |
They will all gang up and reject the appeal as per.....it's only lil olde Rochdale. | | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 14:14 - Aug 13 with 3159 views | fermin |
| Hills Comments After Game on 11:30 - Aug 13 by TVOS1907 |
Do you mean McIntyre? |
Er, probably, it was a while ago . . . | | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 15:25 - Aug 13 with 3088 views | ColDale |
We have lost the appeal | | | |
| Hills Comments After Game on 15:40 - Aug 13 with 3065 views | ChaffRAFC |
| Hills Comments After Game on 15:25 - Aug 13 by ColDale |
We have lost the appeal |
I've never been so surprised in my whole life. Honest. | |
| If I hadn't seen such riches, I could live with being poor |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
