| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays 15:13 - Dec 7 with 36258 views | Plazex |
Actually looks as if Sakho took fabianski down. Hope we have the card rescinded. And bloody hell 3-1 crap. |  |
| |  |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:20 - Dec 7 with 8535 views | lidojack |
Can a red card be rescinded for a foul in the build up? If the fa feel like the foul was worthy of a red card can they rescind it for the handball? |  | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:20 - Dec 7 with 8531 views | Parlay |
There is no way that will be rescinded. |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:21 - Dec 7 with 8527 views | jack247 |
Can't even see us appealing that to be honest | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:26 - Dec 7 with 8457 views | ApeShit |
Ref missed the handball before Fabianski even touched him!
[Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:26]
|  | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:28 - Dec 7 with 8399 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:26 - Dec 7 by ApeShit |
Ref missed the handball before Fabianski even touched him!
[Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:26]
|
It wont matter in terms of an appeal, separate incidents. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:28]
| |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:28 - Dec 7 with 8384 views | monmouth |
I would be astonished if that were appealed and rescinded. It may have been flawed with a swans bias, and given by a massive homer, but no one will overrule the match ref on that decision. |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:32 - Dec 7 with 8335 views | lidojack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:28 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
It wont matter in terms of an appeal, separate incidents. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:28]
|
If common sense prevails they will be considered the same incident though.
If the ref gives the handball there's no red card.
If the striker doesn't handball it he doesn't get it around Fabianski and there's no goal scoring opportunity to deny and therefore no red card. | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:33 - Dec 7 with 8310 views | BLAZE |
Im just annoyed a very cynical and deliberate handball paid off for him. Dont know if the ref was in a position to see it but it was very obviously done to take the ball around Fab and it sealed the game for them essentially. Fkin annoying. And they had a hissy over Chicos dramatics - well this is worse imo. Cheating plain and simple.
West Ham really are media darlings eh [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:34]
|  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:34 - Dec 7 with 8285 views | canhecatchit |
ref sent him off for stopping a goal scorring attampt. When in fact the ref stopped sxcko from attempting to score by blowing up early when he wanted to carry on and score, this card should be rescinded every time |  |
| Swansea City, my one and only love , oh and then there's the Wife |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:35 - Dec 7 with 8279 views | union_jack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:20 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
There is no way that will be rescinded. |
Not what Smith and York are saying?! |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays (n/t) on 15:35 - Dec 7 with 8275 views | canhecatchit |
[Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:36]
| |
| Swansea City, my one and only love , oh and then there's the Wife |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays (n/t) on 15:35 - Dec 7 with 8273 views | canhecatchit |
[Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:36]
| |
| Swansea City, my one and only love , oh and then there's the Wife |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:40 - Dec 7 with 8185 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:32 - Dec 7 by lidojack |
If common sense prevails they will be considered the same incident though.
If the ref gives the handball there's no red card.
If the striker doesn't handball it he doesn't get it around Fabianski and there's no goal scoring opportunity to deny and therefore no red card. |
Nowt to do with common sense. They would be reviewing Fabianskis impeding of Sakho not Sakhos handball.
If you could give handballs after the match on reviews then France wouldnt have knocked Ireland out with Henrys famous hand. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:42 - Dec 7 with 8163 views | scottishjack |
I might be wrong here, but if it is a red card incident, shouldn't the ref stop lay immediately? You can play advantage on a yellow card, but not a red? Any refs on here? |  | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:43 - Dec 7 with 8143 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:35 - Dec 7 by union_jack |
Not what Smith and York are saying?! |
Dont care what they are saying, you cannot review a not given handball afterwards. What will be reviewed is if Fabiański impeded Sakho - which he did.
Review panels are to overturn obvious mistakes, sending iff Fabianski handball aside is not a clear cut error on the refs part, in fact id have sent him off too if i didnt see the handball. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:44 - Dec 7 with 8123 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:34 - Dec 7 by canhecatchit |
ref sent him off for stopping a goal scorring attampt. When in fact the ref stopped sxcko from attempting to score by blowing up early when he wanted to carry on and score, this card should be rescinded every time |
He did, Sakho played on. But he is well within his rights to send off after seeing if a goal would be scored anyway. Refs are told to try and keep the game 11 v 11 if possible in those situations. But in this case he blew a second after the contact as replays showed. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:45]
| |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:46 - Dec 7 with 8078 views | Jackfath |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:44 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
He did, Sakho played on. But he is well within his rights to send off after seeing if a goal would be scored anyway. Refs are told to try and keep the game 11 v 11 if possible in those situations. But in this case he blew a second after the contact as replays showed. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:45]
|
If he had scored, would the ref allowed it or pulled play back? |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:47 - Dec 7 with 8072 views | LeonisGod |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:28 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
It wont matter in terms of an appeal, separate incidents. [Post edited 7 Dec 2014 15:28]
|
Disagree. He knocked the ball past him with his hand. Without that Fab looked like he was getting the ball. But we'll see. |  | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:48 - Dec 7 with 8052 views | union_jack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:46 - Dec 7 by Jackfath |
If he had scored, would the ref allowed it or pulled play back? |
Whistle went before he kicked it so would not have counted. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:51 - Dec 7 with 8029 views | QuakerJack |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:48 - Dec 7 by union_jack |
Whistle went before he kicked it so would not have counted. |
Do you honestly think that? He had a look to see if he scored. He'd have given it and sent him off. |  |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:53 - Dec 7 with 7989 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:46 - Dec 7 by Jackfath |
If he had scored, would the ref allowed it or pulled play back? |
Now it appears he had blown for the foul initially then it wouldnt have mattered whether he scored or not. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:53 - Dec 7 with 7989 views | BLAZE |
Im sure Sky Sports enchanced the audio which showed the ref blew up before the shot, so even if the ball went in it wouldn't have stood. He chose to show the red not play advantage.
Unfortunately I don't think the hand ball would be taken into account in a review.... But arguably play should have been dead the instant he handballed it, meaning no red card. But that's just tough luck on our part. Cheating prospered on this occasion | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:55 - Dec 7 with 7956 views | Parlay |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:47 - Dec 7 by LeonisGod |
Disagree. He knocked the ball past him with his hand. Without that Fab looked like he was getting the ball. But we'll see. |
Nothing to disagree with, they are separate fouls and only one can be reviewed. That's just fact.
The foul that will be reviewed if appealed (we wont appeal) will be fabianskis on Sakho regardless of handball. And that was a foul and he did stop a clear goalscoring opportunity. | |
| |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 16:01 - Dec 7 with 7900 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 15:43 - Dec 7 by Parlay |
Dont care what they are saying, you cannot review a not given handball afterwards. What will be reviewed is if Fabiański impeded Sakho - which he did.
Review panels are to overturn obvious mistakes, sending iff Fabianski handball aside is not a clear cut error on the refs part, in fact id have sent him off too if i didnt see the handball. |
on what basis would you have sent him off?
Irrespective of the obvious handball, there is no obligation whatsoever on a player to get out of the way if a player just runs into him which is what happened.
Fabianski didn't put his hands out, he didn't jump into him - he went out and blocked the angle which he is perfectly entitled to do. Sakho ran into him (actually with a slight push from Williams). The only reason it looked like a foul was the handball. The only possible foul was against Ash for the push - possible yellow card. The decision was incorrect.
We'll appeal that and it will get overturned, again! And we'll still have lost a chance at a point because of it.
Dear God - that was up there with the most biased commentary and match build up I have ever seen (including the BT coverage of the Man Utd match) and even they thought it wasn't a sending off, and yet we have so called Swans fans falling over themselves to justify another shocking decision because it fits with some sort of warped agenda. | | | |
| Fabianski red card-Seen the replays on 16:02 - Dec 7 with 7889 views | jack247 |
He was being sent off whether the shot went in or not. I'm not sure how the ref can play advantage and then bring them back for the free kick. No doubt it would have counted if he had scored and I can't see how a shot at an unguarded net, albeit from a tight angle, isn't classed as an advantage | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.