Chelsea

[Vermilion]

It was only a shove and totally understandable. It's a shame that his ****ty manager and club are involved but Matic responded in the way I wish most footballers would

If every player reacted like that after a tackle they felt was too hard, what sort of game would we have though Norbs, every player letting the red mist decend ?

I'd prefer any player to react with contempt rather than what Matic did, as if to say... 'hurt me!??? You'll have to do better than that! whimp! call that a tackle!??'.

[Norbs]

If every player reacted like that after a tackle they felt was too hard, what sort of game would we have though Norbs, every player letting the red mist decend ?

I'd prefer any player to react with contempt rather than what Matic did, as if to say... 'hurt me!??? You'll have to do better than that! whimp! call that a tackle!??'.

I'd love the carnage

[EwarWoo]

It was heat of the moment. He'd just almost had his leg snapped.

Accidental, intentional, pass, tackle, whatever it is you can understand a moment of madness.

He still had to go but I think its fair the ban was reduced.

[Exiled_red]

I think that reducing the ban from the manditory 3 games (for violent conduct which it was) to 2 games sets a dangerous precedent, as I imagine most players could claim some level of provocation so where do you draw the line? (Incidentally the Barnes challenge and punishment / lack of it is a seperate issue)

[Vermilion]

I think that reducing the ban from the manditory 3 games (for violent conduct which it was) to 2 games sets a dangerous precedent, as I imagine most players could claim some level of provocation so where do you draw the line? (Incidentally the Barnes challenge and punishment / lack of it is a seperate issue)

Agreed, it's almost like saying to players, if you're on the end of a bad tackle, accidental or not, and you decide to lump the player that did it, we'll look on it favorably when it comes to disciplining you. edit: So long as your manager whinges non stop obviously.

[EwarWoo]

But they're not looking upon it favourably, he's getting a 2 game ban not a free pony. They've just took into account mitigating circumstances.

Isn't that a normal part of sentencing?

[Red_Polo]

It was heat of the moment. He'd just almost had his leg snapped.

Accidental, intentional, pass, tackle, whatever it is you can understand a moment of madness.

He still had to go but I think its fair the ban was reduced.

So what? It might make it more understandable but it doesn't make it more right. Punishment should be unaffected. Rough tackles with potential to cause injury are not exceptional circumstances excusing aggressive reaction, even in part.

This is another media win for that Machiavellian scumbag Jose.

Dyche was spot the **** on in that video.

[EwarWoo]

I sense the Chelsea hatred clouding common sense.

[rodo]

The words of Jose Mourinho still echo: 'This is end of career.' I can only hope Martin Atkinson was listening.
The focus is on the referee and rightly so. He’s paid a minimum of £85,000-a-year to watch games and make decisions. Some are difficult, referees will make mistakes, but Atkinson was guilty of not watching the game when Chelsea and Burnley fought out a 1-1 draw at Stamford Bridge. It’s as simple as that.
Some say it’s more proof that we need technology – indeed that is Mourinho’s view. But why are we paying referees a healthy salary – three times the national average – if they can’t even see what is right in front of them? Jason Shackell’s foul on Diego Costa, the obvious handball in the box from Michael Kightly, Ashley Barnes kicking Branislav Ivanovic, and then Barnes' challenge on Nemanja Matic. If we bring in technology, I’m assuming referees’ pay will be dramatically reduced.

Atkinson’s failure could have had horrible consequences. A Burnley player, Barnes, was allowed to get away with bending and nearly breaking a fellow professional’s leg. I don’t think Barnes is malicious, but I do think he is at best careless, and at worst reckless.
But he is also a player who received a seven-match ban for deliberately tripping up a referee during a game he played for Brighton two years ago. The punishment has seemingly not registered as a deterrent.
Some excessively physical challenges can be excused in the context of any given game, or the competitive spirit of the players. But Barnes on Matic was beyond any mitigation.

The FA have hidden behind their own inadequate rulebook and so there will be no further action taken against Barnes.
He is getting away with it for two reasons: firstly because the ref was so excruciatingly bad everybody is talking about him; secondly, Burnley are everyone’s favourite underdogs, and Sean Dyche is impossible to dislike. Barnes himself has done well as a professional footballer to lift himself up the leagues and make a mark in the Premier League, and I admire him for that. All of these reasons somehow come together to make it hard to criticise Burnley.
Add to that the fact that your average football fan outside of Stamford Bridge dislikes Chelsea, and loves to see Jose Mourinho slip up, and it becomes easy to focus on the bad referee, rather than the naughty footballer.

If common sense were to be applied instead of the FA’s chopped logic, what would happen here?
With his previous offence in mind, Barnes should be banned for the rest of the season. It would focus his mind in a way the previous ban didn’t. It would also send out a real message to professional footballers that they can’t get away with such challenges. They have a duty of care to fellow professionals.
Atkinson should be put on gardening leave and his position reviewed in the summer.

My instinct tells me Matic was rightly sent off. He was aggressive and then violent with Barnes. But when you look at the circumstances, I think there is definitely a case in this instance for the FA to rescind Matic’s red card but warn him about his future conduct. He is a player with no obvious history of violent conduct on the pitch, but he is a man who objects strongly when someone tries to break his leg. He didn’t swing a punch, he just bundled Barnes over.
After failing to deal with Barnes in an appropriate manner, the Football Association can redeem themselves here. So do the right thing FA, and let Nemanja Matic play at Wembley on Sunday.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz3SjHAQocJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Norbs]

I think that reducing the ban from the manditory 3 games (for violent conduct which it was) to 2 games sets a dangerous precedent, as I imagine most players could claim some level of provocation so where do you draw the line? (Incidentally the Barnes challenge and punishment / lack of it is a seperate issue)

Things is though, it was only a shove in the back. A punch, elbow, kick or headbutt is violent, but I honestly don't think a shove is. Had he booted him in the back of the knee or launched a Cantona Kung Fu style lunge then I'd agree wholeheartedly.

[Norbs]

I sense the Chelsea hatred clouding common sense.

I hate Chelsea more than anyone on here and have been pulled up on saying that to me they represent our biggest rival. In this instance though I understand Matic's actions. Seeing that he's a Chelsea player, I couldn't give a hoot about the length of the ban and am glad he's gojng to miss the final. I'll be rooting for Spurs and hope that Chelsea lose it because of inadequacies in midfield, just so that it boils Jose's piss

[Assassin]

I hate Chelsea more than anyone on here and have been pulled up on saying that to me they represent our biggest rival. In this instance though I understand Matic's actions. Seeing that he's a Chelsea player, I couldn't give a hoot about the length of the ban and am glad he's gojng to miss the final. I'll be rooting for Spurs and hope that Chelsea lose it because of inadequacies in midfield, just so that it boils Jose's piss

Oh, no you dont.....

[Trippendicular]

The words of Jose Mourinho still echo: 'This is end of career.' I can only hope Martin Atkinson was listening.
The focus is on the referee and rightly so. He’s paid a minimum of £85,000-a-year to watch games and make decisions. Some are difficult, referees will make mistakes, but Atkinson was guilty of not watching the game when Chelsea and Burnley fought out a 1-1 draw at Stamford Bridge. It’s as simple as that.
Some say it’s more proof that we need technology – indeed that is Mourinho’s view. But why are we paying referees a healthy salary – three times the national average – if they can’t even see what is right in front of them? Jason Shackell’s foul on Diego Costa, the obvious handball in the box from Michael Kightly, Ashley Barnes kicking Branislav Ivanovic, and then Barnes' challenge on Nemanja Matic. If we bring in technology, I’m assuming referees’ pay will be dramatically reduced.

Atkinson’s failure could have had horrible consequences. A Burnley player, Barnes, was allowed to get away with bending and nearly breaking a fellow professional’s leg. I don’t think Barnes is malicious, but I do think he is at best careless, and at worst reckless.
But he is also a player who received a seven-match ban for deliberately tripping up a referee during a game he played for Brighton two years ago. The punishment has seemingly not registered as a deterrent.
Some excessively physical challenges can be excused in the context of any given game, or the competitive spirit of the players. But Barnes on Matic was beyond any mitigation.

The FA have hidden behind their own inadequate rulebook and so there will be no further action taken against Barnes.
He is getting away with it for two reasons: firstly because the ref was so excruciatingly bad everybody is talking about him; secondly, Burnley are everyone’s favourite underdogs, and Sean Dyche is impossible to dislike. Barnes himself has done well as a professional footballer to lift himself up the leagues and make a mark in the Premier League, and I admire him for that. All of these reasons somehow come together to make it hard to criticise Burnley.
Add to that the fact that your average football fan outside of Stamford Bridge dislikes Chelsea, and loves to see Jose Mourinho slip up, and it becomes easy to focus on the bad referee, rather than the naughty footballer.

If common sense were to be applied instead of the FA’s chopped logic, what would happen here?
With his previous offence in mind, Barnes should be banned for the rest of the season. It would focus his mind in a way the previous ban didn’t. It would also send out a real message to professional footballers that they can’t get away with such challenges. They have a duty of care to fellow professionals.
Atkinson should be put on gardening leave and his position reviewed in the summer.

My instinct tells me Matic was rightly sent off. He was aggressive and then violent with Barnes. But when you look at the circumstances, I think there is definitely a case in this instance for the FA to rescind Matic’s red card but warn him about his future conduct. He is a player with no obvious history of violent conduct on the pitch, but he is a man who objects strongly when someone tries to break his leg. He didn’t swing a punch, he just bundled Barnes over.
After failing to deal with Barnes in an appropriate manner, the Football Association can redeem themselves here. So do the right thing FA, and let Nemanja Matic play at Wembley on Sunday.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz3SjHAQocJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Did the Daily Mail get this from the Chelsea website or something?

[fah-q]

It wouldn't be so bad if a) The FA had any kind of consistency in their punishments/appeals process. b) Jose wasn't such a massive hypocrite, turning a blind eye to his own players indiscretions/physical assaults.

[Norbs]

Oh, no you dont.....

Tee runs me a close 2nd