The tackle didn’t endanger any safety, was not excessive or brutal. Therefore not serious foul play. It was though a reckless tackle which should have resulted in a yellow card.
For all the effort in that second half, it's now just 2 wins in our last 7 league games. 17 points from 33 available since the turn of the year. We need to improve to get over the line and that has to start with 6 points in the next week. At our current rate, we will finish 3rd or 4th.
Well we can all look forward to it being fully rescinded then. Except it definitely won’t be. Threshold for what an official classes as dangerous play has moved on a tad from where you think it is. You don’t have to like it or agree with it, but those are the laws of the game.
Did you see how fast Simons was running???? I'd say that it was excessive force. Had he gone in with his toes, it would have looked more innocent. He went in with his studs. If Laird had decided to check back, and had his feet planted, he would have caused some serious damage.
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
Interesting debate on the yellow or red card incident. I think we all agree that it was a challenge that didn’t need to be made and like many tackles it looks much worse on slow motion replays than it did in real time. Was the referee influenced by Laird’s reaction? Probably, but only he knows that. Would most referees have shown a red card rather than yellow? Probably if they were applying the laws of the game to the letter. I would be surprised if we appeal it.
as others have said there’s no way that’s getting overturned. I think it should have been a yellow but it was probably an orange challenge due to the speed. I think the ref was influenced by the crowd too.
It’s his job but the human element of subjectivity also has an influence. The words dangerous, reckless etc can mean different things to different people.
Comments
Yeah, first half was poor, but to his credit he rectified it.
What's our standard deviation from the League One mean?
The course never ends!
That's a bit mean
The tackle didn’t endanger any safety, was not excessive or brutal. Therefore not serious foul play. It was though a reckless tackle which should have resulted in a yellow card.
You don't want to be reckless with your tackle in the away end toilets at Birmingham
That's your opinion, it wasn't the opinion of the referee.
It was excessive as he missed the ball and quite clearly took out their player, in my opinion.
I don't think I've ever been in an away end toilet with spikes on the walls
For all the effort in that second half, it's now just 2 wins in our last 7 league games. 17 points from 33 available since the turn of the year. We need to improve to get over the line and that has to start with 6 points in the next week. At our current rate, we will finish 3rd or 4th.
Well we can all look forward to it being fully rescinded then. Except it definitely won’t be. Threshold for what an official classes as dangerous play has moved on a tad from where you think it is. You don’t have to like it or agree with it, but those are the laws of the game.
Here is the law:
This was not excessive force, it was just a mistimed tackle, albeit reckless in nature. And this is why I think there is a strong case for appealing.
Respect your opinion but it would be laughed out of court and I'm sure WWFC won't appeal so save your anger
Are you aware of such a place?
Did you misread wiki?
First English club to get to the final of one.
They lost both of their Inter cities fairs finals.
Much better second half and looked really good with three at the back. I wonder if Dodds may go with this going forward.
Did you see how fast Simons was running???? I'd say that it was excessive force. Had he gone in with his toes, it would have looked more innocent. He went in with his studs. If Laird had decided to check back, and had his feet planted, he would have caused some serious damage.
I’m not sure how fast a player is running is in the laws of the game. If you are giving reds for that most games will have sending offs.
Directly from the FA website
Law 12: Fouls and Misconduct
IFAB Laws of the Game 2024-25
SERIOUS FOUL PLAY
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
That’s the law. There was no excessive force. He just made a tackle, mistimed, reckless.
Is that 3 games out then?
The fact there seems to be a fairly 5050 split on it on the gasroom suggests it wasn't a cut and dried decision.
But it's clear those ones tend to go the way of the big home crowd.
Interesting debate on the yellow or red card incident. I think we all agree that it was a challenge that didn’t need to be made and like many tackles it looks much worse on slow motion replays than it did in real time. Was the referee influenced by Laird’s reaction? Probably, but only he knows that. Would most referees have shown a red card rather than yellow? Probably if they were applying the laws of the game to the letter. I would be surprised if we appeal it.
Yes three games for serious foul play. He will miss Burton, Peterborough and Wrexham unless it gets overturned.
WWIII is going to really fuck up the last remaining fixtures. Will we have enough expected points to go up? Asking for A swann.
That will be a big miss, especially against Wrexham.
It is the referees job to apply the laws of the game to the letter.
There isn't a chance it gets overturned.
as others have said there’s no way that’s getting overturned. I think it should have been a yellow but it was probably an orange challenge due to the speed. I think the ref was influenced by the crowd too.
Seriously @Midlander, you just tried to argue something else was the law?
Sometimes you have to acknowledge that maybe a player of the club you support made a bad challenge.
It’s his job but the human element of subjectivity also has an influence. The words dangerous, reckless etc can mean different things to different people.