Henri Lansbury

[Vive_La_Villa]

2 hours ago, gilbertoAVFC said:

Honestly, we will get done for frivilous appeal here. On what planet is this not a red? Just because people get away with this kind of behaviour at Sunday league it does not justify it being "just a yellow" here where there are standards to uphold and referees are under more obligation to make these decisions that risk injury. It's a disgusting challenge. I firmly believe that Adama's red had no bearing on the ref's decision.

Maybe it's the angle on the replay (I have only seen one), but for me:

- Cynical. Yes, not last man, but 100% a yellow if he just tugged his shirt, which is not in the least bit dangerous but the rule.

- Dangerous. He has literally c**ted him from behind in the back of the knee. The phrase gets banded around too often, but if you are the attacker and not expecting the contact, you are risking a serious injury. 

- Malicious. Not only dangerous, but 100% deliberate and done out of pure anger. It is a nasty, nasty challenge which, for me ticks all of the main boxes for a red card. It's not a trip, it's a lunge.

There is not a chance in hell this gets rescinded, and is far more likely to result in a lengthier ban. The only reason this has been done is a desperate attempt to save face on Bruce's part.

Genuinely baffled by this appeal. It's embarrassing.

Completely agree. We shouldn't be appealing this on the grounds it's normally a yellow card. It was a bad tackle. End of.

Agree it is embarrassing we are appealing it but I guess no harm in it.

Edited September 13, 2017 by Vive_La_Villa

[tom_avfc]

It was an almost identical red card to one I saw xhaka get for arsenal - might have been against Swansea.

At the time of that one I applauded the sentiment of the red card. They're both completely deliberate fouls made with absolutely no intent of getting the ball.

I'm completely in favour of these being red cards as I hate the games where teams will just take turns to completely wipe out a counter attacking player and this is a way to prevent that.

Having said all this, it's not a red card by the current rules and Lansbury knows he's 'taking the yellow for the team', another part of modern football which I can't stand.

Add this in with the diving seen yesterday (Kodjia, Lansbury, Snodgrass for us) and you can see why people are getting bored of the game really.

[Zatman]

only saw that photo but looks a tackle from behind is a stupid tackle to make especially when other team down to 10 men

[Vive_La_Villa]

Quote from Jeff Winter.  100% agree with the below.

“It’s the old ‘taking one for the team’ type of challenge. The opposition break away and a chasing player clips the heels of the man on the ball.

“If Lansbury had just tripped Marvin Johnson then it would have been a yellow because it wasn’t a goalscoring opportunity. But he took it to another level by more or less kicking him.

[mikeyp102]

Never a red, Barry was the master of doing these for us 

[Dr_Pangloss]

9 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said:

Never a red, Barry was the master of doing these for us 

Do not remember Barry ever lunging in from behind like that, a trip yes, but nothing that stupid.

[OutByEaster?]

2 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Quote from Jeff Winter.  100% agree with the below.

“It’s the old ‘taking one for the team’ type of challenge. The opposition break away and a chasing player clips the heels of the man on the ball.

“If Lansbury had just tripped Marvin Johnson then it would have been a yellow because it wasn’t a goalscoring opportunity. But he took it to another level by more or less kicking him.

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/top-referees-verdict-henri-lansbury-13616582

Quote

And Winter, who was at the game to support his beloved Boro

From the same article.

I think we'll win the appeal.

 

[Keyblade]

4 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Quote from Jeff Winter.  100% agree with the below.

“It’s the old ‘taking one for the team’ type of challenge. The opposition break away and a chasing player clips the heels of the man on the ball.

“If Lansbury had just tripped Marvin Johnson then it would have been a yellow because it wasn’t a goalscoring opportunity. But he took it to another level by more or less kicking him.

This is exactly it. If it was a cynical trip it would have been a yellow all day long. But instead he literally kicked at him, directly from behind with his studs up. It was a dangerous tackle, he could have easily caught his calf there and  seriously injured him. 

[TrentVilla]

 

By the letter of the law I'm not sure it's a red but at the same time I think it was justified, I think we've grounds for appeal and if we do obviously the club will. Personally though I think that should be a red.

[Rob182]

14 hours ago, villaglint said:

My initial reaction during the game was that it's the classic yellow card, deliberate foul but he's done it so badly I hope the ref doesn't overreact and make it more. I worried about the red before it came out and for that Lamsbury is stupid because whether it was right call he gave the ref a decision to make (ie whether it deserved more than the usual yellow)

But also, when you've been watching football for decades and have seen the same challenge met with a yellow card hundreds of times, maybe he's not wrong in assuming that that's what he'd be given. I think the ref gave a red to even the game up, after giving Adama a (harsh, imo) red, but players shouldn't have to second guess that a ref will make a second wrong call to make up for an earlier wrong call. The ref should have given a yellow.

[Eastie]

53 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

 

By the letter of the law I'm not sure it's a red but at the same time I think it was justified, I think we've grounds for appeal and if we do obviously the club will. Personally though I think that should be a red.

Should have been a yellow in my view but he can have little complaint as he escaped a booking when he dived earlier in the game in the box - I think it would be a one game though not a 3 game ban as it wasn't violent conduct ? 

[Eastie]

11 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

But also, when you've been watching football for decades and have seen the same challenge met with a yellow card hundreds of times, maybe he's not wrong in assuming that that's what he'd be given. I think the ref gave a red to even the game up, after giving Adama a (harsh, imo) red, but players shouldn't have to second guess that a ref will make a second wrong call to make up for an earlier wrong call. The ref should have given a yellow.

Agree , I think both should have had a yellow and the referee needs demoting a few levels - he was dire .

[Stevo985]

16 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

But also, when you've been watching football for decades and have seen the same challenge met with a yellow card hundreds of times, maybe he's not wrong in assuming that that's what he'd be given. I think the ref gave a red to even the game up, after giving Adama a (harsh, imo) red, but players shouldn't have to second guess that a ref will make a second wrong call to make up for an earlier wrong call. The ref should have given a yellow.

This.

There's no way if it was 11 vs 11 that would have been a red.

Terrible reffing.

[sne]

Appeal went through apparently.

[gilbertoAVFC]

Well I'll be damned.

[Nigel]

Not much of a surprise really!

I struggle to remember a worse ref!

[Stevo985]

Obvious result is obvious.

Right outcome, never ever a red card.

[omariqy]

I'd give him a red as a Villa fan for the pure stupidity of it.  But glad it got overturned. I thought he was playing fairly well before that red.

[Eastie]

Wonder if traore was overturned too - both should have been yellow.

[OutByEaster?]

That's the right decision I think.

I don't think Boro appealed Traore's did they? His would be much more difficult to overturn - it was reckless and the player was off the ground and out of control.