Page 1 of 1
Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:53 amby Justified logic
Not heard anything myself yet.
All pundits saying it should have been a penalty and a red card. Walker has admitted it. Surely merely a formality now? - that he will miss the FA Cup game at home to the mighty Wycombe Wanderers(!)
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:56 amby Foreverinbluedreams
Has there ever been retrospective action for anything other than violent conduct charges?
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:01 pmby Feed The Goat
Doesn't help us so I'm not really bothered if he gets fined banned or whatever
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:34 pmby freshie
Not a chance
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:39 pmby sheblue
Brown envelope in the post.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:53 pmby iwasthere2012
Who cares.
The damage is done.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:02 pmby Moonchesteri
But wouldn't it have been just a yellow even if we had got the penalty with the new rules?
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:06 pmby phips
Moonchesteri wrote:But wouldn't it have been just a yellow even if we had got the penalty with the new rules?
no. the triple jeopardy thing dent apply here since one of the exceptions to that is a push, which is what Walker did. would've been a red.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:08 pmby Foreverinbluedreams
phips wrote:Moonchesteri wrote:But wouldn't it have been just a yellow even if we had got the penalty with the new rules?
no. the triple jeopardy thing dent apply here since one of the exceptions to that is a push, which is what Walker did. would've been a red.
The wording of the rule:
A foul on a running striker committed by the last man of the defence will no longer result in a direct red card and suspension, unless the foul is violent or consists in a hand-ball in the box. As long as the foul is judged to be an honest attempt at taking the ball, the defender will only be shown a yellow card.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:38 pmby blues2win
It wasn't an honest attempt to get the ball. Red.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:11 pmby iwasthere2012
That's how Howard Webb and just about everyone else interpreted it.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:50 pmby Hazy2
Sterling banned for 3 games for Yaya saying he should have gone down.
plus Ferna 1 given an extra game for wearing jeans and flip flops in January.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:25 pmby zuricity
Hazy2 wrote:Sterling banned for 3 games for Yaya saying he should have gone down.
plus Ferna 1 given an extra game for wearing jeans and flip flops in January.
if Sterling had scored that cnut of a ref would have pulled it back for a free kick on the edge of the box.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:52 pmby nottsblue
If Walker had pulled out a Stanley knife and slashed Sterling he still wouldn't be retrospectively punished. More likely Sterling would be in trouble for inciting trouble.
To be honest I don't have a problem with Walker committing the foul as it's up to the match officials to spot it and punish it. Also, admitting it after is fair game and it's then up to the administrators of the game to punish him. The fact they haven't and won't speaks more about where they are at
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:59 pmby zuricity
nottsblue wrote:If Walker had pulled out a Stanley knife and slashed Sterling he still wouldn't be retrospectively punished. More likely Sterling would be in trouble for inciting trouble.
To be honest I don't have a problem with Walker committing the foul as it's up to the match officials to spot it and punish it. Also, admitting it after is fair game and it's then up to the administrators of the game to punish him. The fact they haven't and won't speaks more about where they are at
indeed like when our defender tweeted 10 versus 12, and got a fine. Surely admitting you did something wrong in the media ( which ever form) is a punishable offense? Sagna thinks so now.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Tue Jan 24, 2017 8:00 pmby zuricity
nottsblue wrote:If Walker had pulled out a Stanley knife and slashed Sterling he still wouldn't be retrospectively punished. More likely Sterling would be in trouble for inciting trouble.
To be honest I don't have a problem with Walker committing the foul as it's up to the match officials to spot it and punish it. Also, admitting it after is fair game and it's then up to the administrators of the game to punish him. The fact they haven't and won't speaks more about where they are at
indeed like when our defender tweeted 10 versus 12, and got a fine. Surely admitting you did something wrong in the media ( which ever form) is a punishable offense? Sagna thinks so now.
Re: Any word on a retrospective ban for Walker?
Posted:
Tue Jan 24, 2017 8:00 pmby zuricity
nottsblue wrote:If Walker had pulled out a Stanley knife and slashed Sterling he still wouldn't be retrospectively punished. More likely Sterling would be in trouble for inciting trouble.
To be honest I don't have a problem with Walker committing the foul as it's up to the match officials to spot it and punish it. Also, admitting it after is fair game and it's then up to the administrators of the game to punish him. The fact they haven't and won't speaks more about where they are at
indeed like when our defender tweeted 10 versus 12, and got a fine. Surely admitting you did something wrong in the media ( which ever form) is a punishable offense? Sagna thinks so now.