PDA

View Full Version : One Match Ban for the OF Pair



Dopey One
18-04-2008, 09:19
Celtic's Gary Caldwell and Rangers' David Weir will receive one-match bans following their part in the melee that concluded Wednesday's Old Firm derby.



The two defenders squared up to each other on the pitch after the final whistle as Celtic won 2-1.




Caldwell will miss Celtic's next league game, against Aberdeen - Weir is out of Sunday's Scottish Cup semi-final.



IMHO this is not fair. They were playing in a league game, so the ban should be in a league game. Yet again, Rankers get away with it.

The Boss
18-04-2008, 11:39
question?!

does cuellar miss the cup or league game?

If he misses the cup game then thats them both out so an even better chance for the saints to do them over, as chances are itl be dailly and clubfoot at c/b.

dufc5
18-04-2008, 12:31
He misses the league game. If your giving a red card for violent conduct then you automatically miss the next dometic match to be played. It is fair it's a rule and the rule should not be broken.

Fairplay
18-04-2008, 12:34
Never mind all that though - more to the point, if they got a red card they get twelve penalty points and you get a ban for every sixteen points, starting two weeks after the card that takes you over the limit. Therefore does anyone know if any of these players will now be banned when they play United? That, i care about ;)

jmo1506
18-04-2008, 12:34
not sure why there need to be different rules for different types of offences? would be easier if a red card meant that the player missed the next game or the next league game, whichever is preferred rather than changing between the two. rangers are lucky here because they could have lost both weir and cuellar for the same game! strange how these anomalies seem to work in their favour.

Fairplay
18-04-2008, 12:47
not sure why there need to be different rules for different types of offences?

I'm not sure either but I remember rightly, when it came out the managers and coaches were all in favour of it.

Basically it is the same rule for everything except violent conduct. The rule was brought in to stop things like players missing cup finals because they got booked for over celebrating in a meaningless end-of-season league game. Players and managers were active in seeking for that to be changed but in the single case of violence against a fellow professional they didn't have the same degree of sympathy.

It is good to clarify this because on the board recently a few people have thought this applied to any straight red card. As Cuellar's case shows, it doesn't apply to all straight reds - only to those for violence.

jmo1506
18-04-2008, 13:00
I'm not sure either but I remember rightly, when it came out the managers and coaches were all in favour of it.

Basically it is the same rule for everything except violent conduct. The rule was brought in to stop things like players missing cup finals because they got booked for over celebrating in a meaningless end-of-season league game. Players and managers were active in seeking for that to be changed but in the single case of violence against a fellow professional they didn't have the same degree of sympathy.

It is good to clarify this because on the board recently a few people have thought this applied to any straight red card. As Cuellar's case shows, it doesn't apply to all straight reds - only to those for violence.

thanks for the info, that makes sense, although i do question why a bit of handbags merits one punishment while a blatant act of cheating to stop a certain goal which could have cost celtic an important win but for a 94th minute winner is deemed to be less serious and merits another. although i guess celtic will be happy enough that cuellar is out for their game (although i think he is honking so wont be upset if he is back in the team for our game)

Fairplay
18-04-2008, 14:13
although i do question why a bit of handbags merits one punishment

The short answer is it doesn't, if the referee agrees that it's handbags. But he considered it to be violence and that's what he put in his report as the reason for the cards.

jmo1506
18-04-2008, 14:46
The short answer is it doesn't, if the referee agrees that it's handbags. But he considered it to be violence and that's what he put in his report as the reason for the cards.

have you seen the footage? it's clearly handbags. i've seen more 'violence' on strictly come dancing!

if players grab each other after the final whistle it will always be construed as violence but in REALITY it certainly did not involve any active conduct eg punching or kicking another player.

Fairplay
18-04-2008, 15:12
have you seen the footage?

Only briefly - didn't seem much to it but if the ref has to put his hands on people to keep them apart he's not going to be happy.

I wasn't saying whether it was handbags or not. I was just answering your query about why the punishment for 'a bit of handbags' was so severe. The point is the ref considered it to be violence. Therefore the punishment is the one for violence, and it's up to the clubs to appeal if they disagree. What we refer to as 'handbags' would only be a yellow card offence after all.

But I still want to know if they'll be suspended against United under the totting up procedure. Depends if they had four or more points outstanding before the OF game. ???

jmo1506
18-04-2008, 15:18
i would be shocked if both cuellar and weir had less than 4 points already. although no one has suggested they could be out for longer. weir is bound to get into bother in the next celtic match so there remains a fair chance that this could have repurcussions when we reach may 10.

jmo1506
18-04-2008, 15:24
and going back to my previous point, fwiw, i still find it hard to believe that the punishment for blatant cheating like in this case (and which could have had a major impact on the outcome of the league title) is the same as behaviour after a match has finished.

personally, if a player deliberately handles on the line to prevent a goal being scored i would award a goal anyway and send him off. why should the team who would have scored but for this deliberate cheating be forced to take a penalty. it's like the penalty try in rugby, if you offend in such a way to prevent a try being scored the ref awards the try anyway. it seems to me that discourages players from cheating, so why not use it in football as well. if you knew that the goal would be awarded anyway would that not make you think twice about batting the ball away?

Fairplay
18-04-2008, 15:29
i would be shocked if both cuellar and weir had less than 4 points already.

Tend to agree that's not a serious possibility. But if say they had 18, they would already have served one ban for 16 points and they wouldn't get another till they got to 32 so 12 on Wednesday wouldn't take them over that.

Most bookings are three points, a few petty things only get one or two but most are three. Straight reds get twelve, a red for two yellows just gets the points associated with the yellows so usually six. That's one of the reasons for the two week delay - it can happen that if a player is on say fourteen points and gets another booking the club needs to know how many points he will get before they know he's suspended.

Fairplay
18-04-2008, 15:38
personally, if a player deliberately handles on the line to prevent a goal being scored i would award a goal anyway and send him off. why should the team who would have scored but for this deliberate cheating be forced to take a penalty. it's like the penalty try in rugby, if you offend in such a way to prevent a try being scored the ref awards the try anyway. it seems to me that discourages players from cheating, so why not use it in football as well.

I tend to agree with that but most people inside the game seem to take a different view. You see it most when a keeper gets a red for handling outside the box. (Now of course he has denied a clear goalscoring opportunity, because otherwise he would only get a yellow for deliberate hand ball). But the pundits and managers (especially down south) seem to think the punishment is too harsh. People have just lost sight of the idea that it's wrong to cheat. :'(

John_Arab
18-04-2008, 16:35
I still think the English League has the right idea, 5 bookings 1 match ban, 5 more then a 2 match ban and so on, therefore everyone knows exactly where they are and there is none of the points nonsense..

Wullie
18-04-2008, 16:40
Billy McKinlay missed our cup win after being sent off or booked, I can't remember exactly which, in a league game away to Motherwell? under the totting up procedure. That was unfair, but it was the rules and I think it's better now.

I think the current system is fair, in respect of how violent conduct it treated, but I would like it to be more like the EPL system.

Fairplay
18-04-2008, 16:42
The English system isn't that different from ours though really, except on the odd occasion when a booking doesn't get three points. Everyone who needs to know understands our system too. It's just that journalists have to make a bit more effort to keep up to date, so they mostly don't bother, so the rest of us don't get kept up to date either. But players and teams will know their own position. And I'm not sure the English system is any more popular down there than ours is up here.

X
18-04-2008, 18:19
The English system isn't that different from ours though really, except on the odd occasion when a booking doesn't get three points. Everyone who needs to know understands our system too. It's just that journalists have to make a bit more effort to keep up to date, so they mostly don't bother, so the rest of us don't get kept up to date either. But players and teams will know their own position. And I'm not sure the English system is any more popular down there than ours is up here.

It's not popular, but it is enforced fairly and (usually) evenly.

FamousToepoke
18-04-2008, 23:35
Billy McKinlay missed our cup win after being sent off or booked, I can't remember exactly which, in a league game away to Motherwell? under the totting up procedure.

It wasn't even an ordering off, it was a booking, and a fairly innoccuous one if I remember correctly. I really felt for him.

Fairplay
19-04-2008, 12:42
It's not popular, but it is enforced fairly and (usually) evenly.

So is ours though. (OK we have Strachan moaning today that he didn't know being reported for violent conduct after the game was equivalent to a red card and claiming Caldwell found out he was suspended from watching TV - all I can say to that is if he didn't know then he should have known.)