Dover (A) reaction thread

[Prodigal Dragon]

Originally Posted by NedStarksGhost

Could it be argued that Grant exceeds the necessary use of force as the keeper had control of the ball, therefore being untouchable?

That would be my take.

[Ooh aah Paskin]

I have just watched a clip of the 'incident' although it wasn't a great angle. I have tried zooming in and pausing to see the contact. It was difficult to say the least! It just looked like as the players were running out Grant clipped the keepers heels, either intentional or not. The keeper went down as if he'd been kneecapped.
Not condoning this if deliberate contact has been made but how many times have we seen players running and colliding? I think the fact it was the keeper with the ball in his hands has made the decision.

However, Grant didn't need to be that close in the first place so made the ref make a decision on it. I'd need to see a better clip from nearer the action to make a judgement on it but I would have said a yellow was enough.

Have to hope the Appeal Committee at least have some decent footage!

But if intent was there, a red should stay a red.

[NedStarksGhost]

Originally Posted by Ooh aah Paskin

I have just watched a clip of the 'incident' although it wasn't a great angle. I have tried zooming in and pausing to see the contact. It was difficult to say the least! It just looked like as the players were running out Grant clipped the keepers heels, either intentional or not. The keeper went down as if he'd been kneecapped.
Not condoning this if deliberate contact has been made but how many times have we seen players running and colliding? I think the fact it was the keeper with the ball in his hands has made the decision.

However, Grant didn't need to be that close in the first place so made the ref make a decision on it. I'd need to see a better clip from nearer the action to make a judgement on it but I would have said a yellow was enough.

Have to hope the Appeal Committee at least have some decent footage!

But if intent was there, a red should stay a red.

I think it's quite clear it's intentional from Grant. He gives him a little kick as he crosses paths to trip him. Don't think that bit can be argued. It's just the severity of it that's up for debate.

[blackbrookred]

There are a few things that could happen . We could appeal and win although I doubt that and we need to remember that if the appeal committee decides it was worthy of a yellow card then the red stands as they only rescind not down grade. They may however decide that the punishment of us playing the game with 10 men was enough and not give a ban as has happened previously. Or they may stick with a 3 game ban, even extending it to 4 if they decide it was a pointless appeal.

[BillEBadass]

I know the rules are changing - is it now possible to get a red card for deliberate stupidity?

[Alan Attack]

Originally Posted by NedStarksGhost

I think it's quite clear it's intentional from Grant. He gives him a little kick as he crosses paths to trip him. Don't think that bit can be argued. It's just the severity of it that's up for debate.

Spot on.

[dixienormous]

Originally Posted by NedStarksGhost

I think it's quite clear it's intentional from Grant. He gives him a little kick as he crosses paths to trip him. Don't think that bit can be argued. It's just the severity of it that's up for debate.

It's pretty severe bellendry.

[NedStarksGhost]

Originally Posted by dixienormous

It's pretty severe bellendry.

Can't argue that.

[Ooh aah Paskin]

Originally Posted by NedStarksGhost

I think it's quite clear it's intentional from Grant. He gives him a little kick as he crosses paths to trip him. Don't think that bit can be argued. It's just the severity of it that's up for debate.

Fair enough, the clip I was watching looked like it was filmed in the 80's!