Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ambitious

Tyrone Mings Stamp

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, RamNut said:

The new angle is not as good as the original footage imo but I have no doubt that it was deliberate. A defender trying to intimidate an an opponent by 'leaving one on him'. Could that be proven beyond all reasonable doubt? Probably not.

It seems that the intention of the f.a. rule change is to allow themselves the opportunity to take retrospective action for incidents whether they are on the ball or off the ball, if there is new evidence that the referee either missed, or gives a clearer view. The intention is to protect players without under mining the referee. Would taking action against Mings undermine the referee? No. There is surely a case for the f.a. to act even within the convoluted wording of their own rules. 

The punishment metered out to Johnson was farcical. The lack of action in this case is extremely regrettable. They should be seen to have investigated and had a hearing, even if the result of that is that they could not conclude with absolute certainty that the action was deliberate. Whether it was on the ball or off the ball is irrelevant. I can only assume that they are pre-judging the potential investigation and avoiding their responsibility to be seen to act, due to the ambiguity of the evidence.

yellow card for the f.a. 

careful, @Davidwill soon be here blah blah rules blah blah you're wrong on and on and on 

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

I think there is general agreement that the system of rules for retroactive action needs work.

Yes perhps, but ......surely this covers it 

Quote

firstly, for acts of violent conduct that occur secondarily to a challenge for the ball

 

Share this post


Link to post

Personally I don't see how retrospective action, what the ref saw etc matter... no matter how much I want to say ban him for life, I just can't see how that looks 100% deliberate.  Without the history I would say I was 50-50. Horrible to think someone could do it in purpose, but I can't say for sure he did.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Chester40 said:

Personally I don't see how retrospective action, what the ref saw etc matter... no matter how much I want to say ban him for life, I just can't see how that looks 100% deliberate.  Without the history I would say I was 50-50. Horrible to think someone could do it in purpose, but I can't say for sure he did.

So ban him for a few games for carelessness at least. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Chester40 said:

Personally I don't see how retrospective action, what the ref saw etc matter... no matter how much I want to say ban him for life, I just can't see how that looks 100% deliberate.  Without the history I would say I was 50-50. Horrible to think someone could do it in purpose, but I can't say for sure he did.

Agree, only he knows for certain whether it was accidental or not but the fact that it was his second involvement in this type of incident tips the balance towards it being deliberate - a cowardly act.

Share this post


Link to post

His stride was approx 2m, he looked down when over Oliveira’s head, broke his stride at about 1m, angled his lower leg back which is something you would never do to try and steady yourself, made sure he connected, and then put in a full stride with left leg forward to land and balance. 

Mens rea would be hard to prove in a court, but negligent actual bodily harm on the basis of recklessness I would think is possible. 

Share this post


Link to post

Only seen the footage today. A true act of cowardice.

From 15 years old to 45 years old I played at varying levels, from Pub league to semi - pro. It will never be proven whether he meant to tread on him or not but based on my playing experience, the guilt is totally proven. 

A 100% avoidable situation.

Unless you don't want to avoid it that is.

Mings is a cowardly thug. Praise be that he didn't come to Derby.

Share this post


Link to post

Just seen that Barnsley’s Cameron McGeeham has been banned for three matches for a stamping incident caught on tv but not seen by match officials, ive not actually seen the incident itself but can’t imagine it being anywhere near as violent and as damaging as this assault my Mings

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, Barnetbyram said:

Just seen that Barnsley’s Cameron McGeeham has been banned for three matches for a stamping incident caught on tv but not seen by match officials, ive not actually seen the incident itself but can’t imagine it being anywhere near as violent and as damaging as this assault my Mings

But the difference is the match officials didn’t see it. They saw Mings, and decided it was an unfortunate accident. FA can’t overule the decision if the ref, apparently. ducking stupid rule though if the FA has access to more information Thant he ref has in the spur of the moment. 

In fact it’s exactly like asking a first responder plolice officer to jump to a conclusion upon arriving at an incident, and saying that his word is final. No need for the court, judge and jury. No need to collect further evidence. The cop on the ground has sorted it. 

Referees are basically judge dredd. Should give them all a law giver and let them get on with it. 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.