Con Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) I still think it was a red card. Accidentally on purpose. Not only a punch with his right, a face cleaner with the same arm, then the temerity to immediately fix eye-contact with the ref pretending nothing had happened. West Ham are trying it on like a closeted transvestite snapchatting a photo of him in his newly promoted girlfriend's bosses knickers, including her on the message, whilst he has excused himself to the upstairs toilet at a dinner party with very important clients. West Ham United to seek legal guidance over FA decision not to overturn Andy Carroll's red card West Ham United are appointing a leading QC in a bid to challenge the Football Association after their appeal against Andy Carroll’s red card was rejected. Carroll branded the verdict “disgraceful” and is furious after West Ham’s claim for wrongful dismissal was upheld, with the £15 million summer signing ruled out of three crucial Premier League matches after appearing to elbow the Swansea City defender Chico Flores. West Ham have been left stunned by the decision and are considering the prospect of suing both the FA and Swansea over the injustice which they fear could result in relegation, costing them an estimated £75 million. The Premier League strugglers are appointing Lord David Pannick, one of the country’s leading and expensive barristers, to explore every possible legal avenue to judge whether they can challenge the procedure. However, they are also furious with Swansea as they argue the Welsh club should be responsible for the conduct of their players, with Flores widely criticised for over exaggerating the flashpoint with Carroll. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/west-ham/10618341/West-Ham-United-to-seek-legal-guidance-over-FA-decision-not-to-overturn-Andy-Carrolls-red-card.html Edited February 5, 2014 by Con Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 i still think its a red card too, the intent is there and he knows what he's doing, the fact that he's only clipped the top of flores' head and that he hasnt covered himself in glory shouldnt take away from the fact that carroll was trying to smash him in the face would be hilarious if they tried to sue, unfortunately though i think thats bullshit, talk about a can of worms... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) Chico is a massive fanny, but I can't see what legal grounds West Ham think they might have had here. Law 12 is quite specific. A player will be sent off for violent conduct and violent conduct is defined as: Violent conduct A player is guilty of violent conduct if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball. He is also guilty of violent conduct if he uses excessive force or brutality against a team-mate, spectator, match official or any other person. Violent conduct may occur either on the field of play or outside its boundaries, whether the ball is in play or not. Advantage should not be applied in situations involving violent conduct unless there is a clear subsequent opportunity to score a goal. The referee must send off the player guilty of violent conduct when the ball is next out of play. Referees are reminded that violent conduct often leads to mass confrontation, therefore they must try to avert this with active intervention. A player, substitute or substituted player who is guilty of violent conduct must be sent off. Howard Webb is the guy who sent Carroll off. The FA ask Webb if, in his opinion, Andy Carroll used excessive force or brutality during his tangle with Chico Flores. Howard Webb says yes. FA uphold the ban. So what do West Ham expect to happen if they bring in a big lawyer? The entire decision is based on the opinion of the referee, and he has already said he stands by his initial decision. How can a lawyer argue against this given that the opinion of a man in an entirely subjective matter? There is no legal definition of excessive force or brutality so how can Webb be wrong? They can't attack his position as having an expert opinion, Webb has refereed an FA Cup final, a Champions League final and a World Cup final. They can't even point to Webb being in the minority on this one because the court of public opinion seems to be in favour of the referee. Personally I think Carroll was unlucky, I wouldn't have sent him off, but that doesn't mean I can't accept Webb's decision to show the red card. Edited February 4, 2014 by The_Rev 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post dAVe80 Posted February 4, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted February 4, 2014 (edited) The biggest crime in that clip isn't the challenge or the swipe, but the fact that two grown men are playing football with their hair tied in a bun, like little girls at a dance contest. Edited February 4, 2014 by dAVe80 24 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) He clearly threw a punch and Howard spotted it and noted it before Carroll touched Chico again and Chico dived around like a fool. It is pretty clear cut. West Ham are just shitting bricks because they are looking likely to get relegated and they'll try anything. Edited February 5, 2014 by CarewsEyebrowDesigner 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I can understand where Carroll is coming from, imagine having to sit out three weeks for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 It's funny that West Ham are looking for help from the law when they cheated Sheffield United. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 Just noticed something new! Watch Howard Webb, his finger goes up on the punch before Carroll has made the swipe with his right arm. He is sending him off for the punch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Yeah CED mentioned a few posts earlier. I don't see how West Ham can complain. If anything it's 2 red cards. One for the punch, the other for an elbow with clear intent. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwpzxjor1 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Didn't there used to be a thing where an unsuccessful appeal added a game ban, to stop clubs just appealing all the time. What happened to that? Rev has summed up public opinion pretty well on it I think, West Ham are just embarrassing themselves if they take it further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Didn't there used to be a thing where an unsuccessful appeal added a game ban, to stop clubs just appealing all the time. What happened to that? Rev has summed up public opinion pretty well on it I think, West Ham are just embarrassing themselves if they take it further. It's just for what they deem "frivolous." West ham at least had a case, so not frivolous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwpzxjor1 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Fair enough. Makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDuck Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Pretty lame red card, but happens to all clubs. Quit yer whingeing Hammers. You'll be relegated cos yer shite, not cos of a 3 match Andy Carroll ban. And if he wasn't banned, he'd get injured anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chappy Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Glad someone mentioned the irony of them looking to lawyers after being (rightly IMO) sued by Sheffield United. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 There is nothing in that and I can see why West Ham are frustrated but the ref has called it as he saw it and you are not going to get that overturned, no matter how important the player is to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) They've gone through with it With the assistance of highly respected QC Lord David Pannick, West Ham sent a letter to the FA on Wednesday outlining their frustration at the procedure which has resulted in their record signing being ruled out for three games. And they are ready to take unprecedented legal action against the governing body if they refuse to allow Carroll another chance to pursue wrongful dismissal. West Ham's board have admitted the move is "a long shot" but they have been so angered by the loss of Carroll they feel there is no alternative. The England international will miss three vital league games against Aston Villa, Norwich and Southampton after his appeal against his red card, for striking Swansea defender Chico Flores, was thrown out by an independent commission appointed by the FA. But West Ham remain hopeful the FA will agree to give Carroll a personal hearing and are confident the forward could even play at Villa Park this weekend. In the letter it is understood they insisted on a response by Friday. The FA declined to comment on the matter on Wednesday but is comfortable the process and rule book was followed before reaching the verdict. Carroll's suspension has polarised opinion, with the £15million forward said to still be "furious" on Wednesday, and Neil Warnock claimed the FA refused to overturn the red card in defence of Howard Webb, the referee. Webb is widely regarded as England's best official and will represent the country at this year's World Cup Finals. But Warnock reckons the FA have attempted to protect the Yorkshireman by allowing the three-game ban to stand. He said on talkSPORT: "Deep down Howard Webb will know he got it wrong. They’ve upheld it because he’s our top referee and he’s going to the World Cup and they don’t want to embarrass him. "I think it’s totally wrong. Everyone on that FA committee – and no-one knows who they are – has got away with murder. They obviously don’t know the game of football."http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/west-ham/10620299/West-Ham-United-threaten-legal-action-against-the-FA-over-Andy-Carroll-suspension.html Edited February 5, 2014 by Jimzk5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I hope the FA increase it to 6 games to teach them a lesson! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Ridiculous. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 absolute idiots some players have had bans for less and appealed and failed. they are making themselves look like fools but not suprised when your under that werewolf gold and that slimeball karen brady Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted February 5, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted February 5, 2014 West Ham are trying it on like a closeted transvestite snapchatting a photo of him in his newly promoted girlfriend's bosses knickers, including her on the message, whilst he has excused himself to the upstairs toilet at a dinner party with very important clients. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts