EUFA Not Lifting Champions League Final Suspensions - Unbelievable!!!!!!

L

Lex Foutish

Registered User
Messages
825
I'll preface my remarks by saying I don't like Man. Utd. very much. A legacy of growing up with a few of their fans! I just heard on the radio that EUFA are not going to lift the bans on Darren Fletcher of Man. Utd. and the Barcelona defender Abidal, both of whom received red cards in the Champions League semi finals. TV replay showed that Fletcher got the ball before Fabregas was touched and Anelka tripped himself up before Abigal was sent off.

Isn't it absolutely daft that the referee, in these televised situations, doesn't know what really happened, and can dismiss players in this fashion, while the millions watching on tv have a clear view and numerous replays of the incidents in question? If there was any justice in the world, both of these players would have their suspensions overturned, as neither of them should have been sent off in the first place.

FIFA President, Sepp Blatter, is totally opposed to having tv replays for referees (many feel that he runs a one man show) and EUFA doesn't allow an appeal of a red card decision!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Justice? :rolleyes:

I took the following from The Guardian's website:-

Uefa spokesman Rob Faulkner said that while United had the right to protest against the decision, there was nothing in the governing body's rules that would allow Fletcher to escape the ban.
Faulkner said: "Manchester United have the right to protest the decision within 24 hours of the match. However the protest is only admissible if the referee made an error and mistakenly identified and cautioned or sent off the wrong player.
"There cannot be an appeal against a factual decision taken by the referee, and there is nothing to indicate that the referee made a mistake in identifying Fletcher as the player he penalised last night."
Even if Rosetti was to admit his decision was wrong, the red card would still stand under article 44.4 of Uefa's disciplinary regulations, which only allows red cards to be rescinded for cases of mistaken identity.



Is it any surprise that so many former soccer afficionados have become so disillusioned by top level soccer these days? It has become poisoned by money, greed, diving, cheating and cynicism.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSGPP_zk4AY



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgtzSe6mU9Y
 
Is it any surprise that so many former soccer afficionados have become so disillusioned by top level soccer these days? It has become poisoned by money, greed, diving, cheating and cynicism
Click to expand...

I understand your grievance with the bans, but I don't understand the link between UEFA not rescinding the red cards and your above quote?
 
In fairness even Sir Alex thought it was a peno from where he was standing and even thought the referee had got it right from the where the ref was standing on the pitch. its a big loss for Sir Alex and for Fletcher but there was no hope of them getting the red card recinded. as for abidal i didnt see that one so cant comment on it. (i dont have access to youtube in work internet).
 
As the OP referred to in the original post - UEFA does not have the authority to overturn red cards unless there is a case of mistaken identity. There was no case of mistaken identity in this incident.

While there may be a case made that the decision was incorrect, you cannot single out specific matches in a tournament of 100s of matches and apply different rules to them. I'm sure there have been mistakes made in other CL matches this season. You cannot change the rules mid tournament and all the teams were aware of the rules going into the tournament.

Not defending UEFA, I personally believe a video reply system should be introduced, but there decision not to overturn the card in this case was 100% correct as per their rules.
 
Didnt stop Uefa from changing the rules for Liverpool when they won the CL and let them get into the CL the next season with 5 entries from England . . .

If it suits UEFA, they will bend the rules, if it doesnt you dont have a chance (its not about whats right or wrong with that shower) . .

As far as TV replays go, I would think that something like tennis has (where a player can contest 2 decisions a game) would be better then changing the whole way the games played. If Fergie could of contested that decision, would the ref of changed his mind, possibly not as it was in the emirates, so there are other variables (you would be better off with a 4th qualified ref to make the decision).

Since not all soccer games are on TV you are going to have to decide which level of games have to have this technology.

Either way it is sad that players miss possibly the biggest games of their careers because refs are too shy, proud or ignorant to admit their mistakes. .
 
NorthDrum said:
Didnt stop Uefa from changing the rules for Liverpool when they won the CL and let them get into the CL the next season with 5 entries from England . . .

If it suits UEFA, they will bend the rules, if it doesnt you dont have a chance (its not about whats right or wrong with that shower) . .

As far as TV replays go, I would think that something like tennis has (where a player can contest 2 decisions a game) would be better then changing the whole way the games played. If Fergie could of contested that decision, would the ref of changed his mind, possibly not as it was in the emirates, so there are other variables (you would be better off with a 4th qualified ref to make the decision).

Since not all soccer games are on TV you are going to have to decide which level of games have to have this technology.

Either way it is sad that players miss possibly the biggest games of their careers because refs are too shy, proud or ignorant to admit their mistakes. .
Click to expand...

The Liverpool case was different, though I take your point, as they changed the rules immediately after so that the holders would automatically be selected and then the remaining three. UEFA assumed that other countries would follow the Spanish example when something similar happened with Real Madrid. They, and most people, never expected a nation to not select the cup holders among its nominees.

However, this situation is greatly different. The governing body would be on very tricky ground with this. How many players have missed games due to unjust decisions and suspensions? OTT red cards happen all the time, I'm not saying I've no sympathy, but over-turning these would cause too much trouble later on and also, in this litigious age, a whole rake of claims for past suspensions.

We know all governing bodies tend to favour the decisions of their referees, even in the face of some bad ones. I can understand that view, even when sometimes it feels a bit unjust.

I still think Fletcher's was a foul and can therefore see how a red card was produced.
 
Latrade said:
The Liverpool case was different, though I take your point, as they changed the rules immediately after so that the holders would automatically be selected and then the remaining three. UEFA assumed that other countries would follow the Spanish example when something similar happened with Real Madrid. They, and most people, never expected a nation to not select the cup holders among its nominees.

However, this situation is greatly different. The governing body would be on very tricky ground with this. How many players have missed games due to unjust decisions and suspensions? OTT red cards happen all the time, I'm not saying I've no sympathy, but over-turning these would cause too much trouble later on and also, in this litigious age, a whole rake of claims for past suspensions.

We know all governing bodies tend to favour the decisions of their referees, even in the face of some bad ones. I can understand that view, even when sometimes it feels a bit unjust.

I still think Fletcher's was a foul and can therefore see how a red card was produced.
Click to expand...

My point was that UEFA are happy to change the rules when it suits their needs. They didnt have to let liverpool back in. I would argue that considering it was Everton who got the 4th spot in England , they knew there would be civil war between the clubs if Everton got thrown out, so took the easy option and caved in. They really should of said , tough wombles Pool, take your grievances to the EPL, but for the sake of their own contradictory rules they changed them. I think it was actually the right thing to do under the circumstances, but that doesnt change the fact it was still "making things up as they went along".

I understand the gravity of this decision but I think that the whole fair play bs they force before games is totally lost on people, particularly when they dont even show any fair play to players in instances like this.

Fletcher may never get a chance to play in a CL final again. I can think of Nedved, Scholes and Keane that missed CL finals, but there wasnt much ground to try to get these rescinded as they got yellows fair and square (there should be a yellow amnest from Semis onwards). Wheres the reward for law, disciplined abiding players like Fletcher who are model professionals in every sense of the word. Surely UEFA could of looked and seen this guy should be made an example of to all who act the tissy and constantly cause trouble by saying in light of the circumstances and Fletchers impeccible discipline record UEFA decided to let him play. They let teams that dont qualify into Europe, qualify by virtue of their disciplinary record over a season, why not have a similar system for good players.

Dont know how anybody could think that was a red card, even by the letter of the law. He got the ball, then the man. Rule states if you get the ball first its a legitimate tackle. The very fact there has been such heated debate and only ABU's and Refs have come out in support of the decision speaks for itself. Nobodys saying it wasnt a tough call, just that common sense should of prevailed but as usual UEFA hide behind the corrodors (probably because of the exact same reason you mentioned, afraid to get some flack for actually doing the right thing).
 
MrMan said:
I understand your grievance with the bans, but I don't understand the link between UEFA not rescinding the red cards and your above quote?
Click to expand...

I can see what you mean MrMan. Part of my point was that UEFA's reluctance to go down the road of real justice in cases like this is consistent with their unwillingness to tackle things like the diving and cheating we seem to see consistently in televised matches. They know these 2 guys are not guilty of sending off offenses but they're still going to have to serve a ban. I'm not a legal expert but I can't see how not being able to appeal a red card offence is legal. Surely tv evidence should be allowed, as cctv footage is in a legal trial.

My money and greed reference was a wider one directed more at players and some clubs who seem to be driven by money and bleeding the fans for every penny they have, thus turning many people off the game. Not directly related to EUFA, as you said. Will have to be clearer in future! :eek:
 
The GAA may have convuluted disciplinary procedures but at least in cases like this, players are cleared. Maybe Man U should have hired Frank Murphy from the Cork County Board !!!
 
The link between the diving and cheating and UEFA is that it has put Man U in the final of the CL.
Fletcher plays for a team that is there because of it.
He got a red card he deserved and it stands because of the rules
If it was overturned by UEFA it would open the floodgates of appeals.
Maybe next season they will change that rule.
If tv evidence was produced and acted on would Man U and Barca still be in the final?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSGPP_zk4AY Fletcher could have got a Red for starting the move by pulling Fabergast by the arm,43sec
Also look a the position of Fabergast's leg in sec 47/48 lucky lad.
 
I won't get into the specifics of whether or not diving and cheating got Man U into the final but one of the fundamental reasons I am going off football at the minute is the amount of "simulation" that is going on and one of (and I accept, not the only one) the key culprits is Ronaldo. The guy falls over so often it's embarrassing.
 
When a player cheats he gives his team unfair advantage.
They get goals,penalty's and disrupt the oppositions attack with it.
Therefore teams that lower themselves and cheat and get away with it go further.
Man U do more simulations than Nintendo hence their in the final.
Then when they want UEFA to Lift a ban for a foul...Unbelievable!!!
As for backing it up,watch the games without rose coloured glasses
and it will become clear.
The simulation or cheating has to stop it's ruining the game.
 
mick1960 said:
When a player cheats he gives his team unfair advantage.
They get goals,penalty's and disrupt the oppositions attack with it.
Therefore teams that lower themselves and cheat and get away with it go further.
Man U do more simulations than Nintendo hence their in the final.
Then when they want UEFA to Lift a ban for a foul...Unbelievable!!!
As for backing it up,watch the games without rose coloured glasses
and it will become clear.
The simulation or cheating has to stop it's ruining the game.
Click to expand...

And the award for the most ridiculous generalisation of the year goes to......!!!

So Man Utd and Barcelona dived their way to the final is what you are saying?
 
Sunny said:
And the award for the most ridiculous generalisation of the year goes to......!!

So Man Utd and Barcelona dived their way to the final is what you are saying?
Click to expand...

In order
No they are mostly facts not generalisation
No,read the post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top