If Taylor was sent off for the apparent kick out then it has to be overturned. I'm sure a new rule came out to say it has to be a certain amount of force. There was no way there was enough force if it was even a kick out itself.
On a separate now. I have heard of fans reporting players to the police... if the FA take no action.. 14 and 15 are both kicking taylor (common assault) plus swearing in front of children (on kids for a £1 day). Let alone 14 grabbing his testicles and pointing them out to the lino... We didn't deserve the win.. but justice.
Come on its happened before and will happen again for and against. Let the fa efl deal with it and we move on with 3 points.
What!! DELIBERATELY treading/stamping on someone’s head!! I’ve certainly never seen it before, live or on TV.......it’s a very very rare occurrence and needs addressing.
I might be trivialising the stamp on the head a bit just think we need to let the fa efl deal with it and move on
Trouble is they won't. They're usrless. They would much rather stick up for an inept referee.
If they don’t take any action that’s ridiculous but I think 15 and 14 will get bans
If Taylor was sent off for the apparent kick out then it has to be overturned. I'm sure a new rule came out to say it has to be a certain amount of force. There was no way there was enough force if it was even a kick out itself.
Hate to say but if that is a rule then it sounds bloody daft
The fact a player has gone to do it regardless of the force used in a kick or slap is wrong in my eyes
If Taylor was sent off for the apparent kick out then it has to be overturned. I'm sure a new rule came out to say it has to be a certain amount of force. There was no way there was enough force if it was even a kick out itself.
Good point, here you go, extract from LAW 12;
VIOLENT CONDUCT
Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
If Taylor was sent off for the apparent kick out then it has to be overturned. I'm sure a new rule came out to say it has to be a certain amount of force. There was no way there was enough force if it was even a kick out itself.
Good point, here you go;
VIOLENT CONDUCT
Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
So that is 14 and 15 plus no 3 and 2 others then for stamping anlso cornering and pinning the lino down in an aggresive way
This is where you've got to feel sorry for the officials
I know Offside is always going to be difficult to decide a clear cut rule but there are too many others that are open to interpretation rather than being purely black and white when its not overly difficult to make them so; i.e. the only person who is going to know if the force was negligible is the offending player and they're always going to claim it was that
He deliberately barged into Bowyer when going into the tunnel which is when it all kicked off.
I may be wrongbut from where I was it looked like Sykes was just about to go down the tunnel when Bowyer deliberately walked up to him and said something which made him react and take a swing. Bowyer was not entirely innocent - and I loved it !
Bowyer was just about to walk into the tunnel and Sykes came up from behind him and shoulder barged him, Bowyer wasn't even looking in his direction. Bowyer turned as if to confront him but was dragged away. Everyone else then piled into the tunnel.
Whether Bowyer said something to Sykes before they reached the tunnel, I don't know, but Sykes definitely barged into Bowyer and started the tunnel ruck!
If Taylor was sent off for the apparent kick out then it has to be overturned. I'm sure a new rule came out to say it has to be a certain amount of force. There was no way there was enough force if it was even a kick out itself.
Hate to say but if that is a rule then it sounds bloody daft
The fact a player has gone to do it regardless of the force used in a kick or slap is wrong in my eyes
Agreed , when it first come out I thought what a ridiculous rule because it now comes down to opinion rather than something set in stone.
On a separate now. I have heard of fans reporting players to the police... if the FA take no action.. 14 and 15 are both kicking taylor (common assault) plus swearing in front of children (on kids for a £1 day). Let alone 14 grabbing his testicles and pointing them out to the lino... We didn't deserve the win.. but justice.
Come on its happened before and will happen again for and against. Let the fa efl deal with it and we move on with 3 points.
What!! DELIBERATELY treading/stamping on someone’s head!! I’ve certainly never seen it before, live or on TV.......it’s a very very rare occurrence and needs addressing.
I might be trivialising the stamp on the head a bit just think we need to let the fa efl deal with it and move on
Trouble is they won't. They're usrless. They would much rather stick up for an inept referee.
If they don’t take any action that’s ridiculous but I think 15 and 14 will get bans
Have a feeling that the FA / EFL will take the easy route out of all this and just charge both clubs for failing to control their players
I agree which would be incorrect. What did we do wrong?
Could argue that the bundle when Taylor was on the floor involved our players regardless of the fact that we were trying to get them away from Taylor, then whatever happened in the tunnel afterwards as the Referee stood on the pitch right in front of the entrance so would have seen what happened
The shocking thing for me is that Sykes is still only 19 and this is his first proper professional season. Therefore he deserves significant punishment for his behaviour or he could be trying it on for the next 15 years.
The number 3, who was in the thick of the ruck and the charge at the linesman, should have known better - 32 year old Mark Hughes, former Everton Academy graduate. Mind you, he did spend a year playing for North Queensland Fury.
I haven't seen clear evidence of a kick though. I suppose the onus will be on the club to prove there wasn't one. But having said that, we don't know what is in the refs report, it could be something else. I don't think he deserved to be sent off and a bit of justice would be a massive boost for us.
I haven't seen clear evidence of a kick though. I suppose the onus will be on the club to prove there wasn't one. But having said that, we don't know what is in the refs report, it could be something else. I don't think he deserved to be sent off and a bit of justice would be a massive boost for us.
Sitting in West Stand and I DEFO saw a Stanley player step forward from the goal side of the pack of players and kick Taylor - not a doubt. Amazed he didn't get sent off.
Now Taylor's dismissal has gone to appeal, the video evidence submitted no doubt will clearly show both Sykes and the other thug deliberately kicking and stamping on Taylor.
And The Sun video has gone viral, so no doubt it's already come to EFL attention.
The only bit that’s gone viral though is the fella going for Taylor’s head, not Sykes. Hopefully he gets collared too. Their GK and Taylor’s red should be overturned in my opinion
OK, so the two thugs get punished retrospectively. Crux of the matter is that won't affect Taylor's red card and we will be without him for three matches - unless they reduce it to one game. But if the 'violent conduct' case is upheld (which, sadly, I believe it will) then three games it will be.
Unfortunately, after much thought I find it difficult to confidently say that the appeal will be successful. Unless of course The Club have submitted video evidence that we have not seen which goes strongly in our favour. My conclusion to this is because it is not absolutely clear that Taylor did not do anything from the angle we have seen it from, he is surrounded by a whole group of players. Albeit he was on the floor for the whole process, and he was assaulted during that time too.
We are not Manchester United where you know that this kind of thing would be rescinded without hesitation. I live in hope until we hear the verdict on Thursday which of course I really hope that our appeal is successful, as personally I haven’t seen any wrongdoing on Taylor’s part.
Further action must be taken against the Accrington Stanley number 14 and 15 as otherwise the EFL and The FA are setting a precedent that this behaviour is acceptable if undetected by the officials at the time. For that I would have to assume they would both receive retrospective bans of at least 3 matches, but at the same time, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
The incident regarding Solly and the assistant by the East Stand would have been Solly knowing how the Accrington Stanley players have already reacted when we both went down to 10 men, so for them to run over to the assistant was not to change his mind, but to give him abuse. I have no doubt in my mind that Solly run over there to get the players away from him, you must take into consideration that Solly was captain on Saturday. If assistants of the main referee make a decision and then change their mind based on the opponent players telling them to, then all credibility and respect is lost. That assistant has now lost control and the confidence of everyone, how can anyone trust his decisions again. Therefore, no change of decision would be made and it is a good job too, as it was correct and it was indeed a penalty.
Overall, we must prepare for Taylor to not be allowed to play, but hope that they see sense this time and having him back available should be looked at as a bonus, if only for the fact that our history with this has not been good.
Accrington Stanley’s Sam Finley has been charged with violent conduct. It follows an incident in the 80th minute of Saturday’s game against Charlton Athletic on 19 January which was not seen by the match officials but caught on camera.
It is alleged the standard punishment of three matches that would otherwise apply is clearly insufficient.
Finley has until 18:00 on 23 January 2019 to respond to the charge.
I wonder if this is bad news for Taylor's appeal? If they received appeals from both Charlton and AS for their respective players yesterday, I would have assumed they would have provided the good news to both clubs at the same time if they believe the red cards for both were unwarranted.
Comments
The fact a player has gone to do it regardless of the force used in a kick or slap is wrong in my eyes
VIOLENT CONDUCT
Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.
I know Offside is always going to be difficult to decide a clear cut rule but there are too many others that are open to interpretation rather than being purely black and white when its not overly difficult to make them so; i.e. the only person who is going to know if the force was negligible is the offending player and they're always going to claim it was that
Whether Bowyer said something to Sykes before they reached the tunnel, I don't know, but Sykes definitely barged into Bowyer and started the tunnel ruck!
The number 3, who was in the thick of the ruck and the charge at the linesman, should have known better - 32 year old Mark Hughes, former Everton Academy graduate. Mind you, he did spend a year playing for North Queensland Fury.
And The Sun video has gone viral, so no doubt it's already come to EFL attention.
Surely some action will be taken?
Hopefully he gets collared too. Their GK and Taylor’s red should be overturned in my opinion
We are not Manchester United where you know that this kind of thing would be rescinded without hesitation. I live in hope until we hear the verdict on Thursday which of course I really hope that our appeal is successful, as personally I haven’t seen any wrongdoing on Taylor’s part.
Further action must be taken against the Accrington Stanley number 14 and 15 as otherwise the EFL and The FA are setting a precedent that this behaviour is acceptable if undetected by the officials at the time. For that I would have to assume they would both receive retrospective bans of at least 3 matches, but at the same time, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
The incident regarding Solly and the assistant by the East Stand would have been Solly knowing how the Accrington Stanley players have already reacted when we both went down to 10 men, so for them to run over to the assistant was not to change his mind, but to give him abuse. I have no doubt in my mind that Solly run over there to get the players away from him, you must take into consideration that Solly was captain on Saturday. If assistants of the main referee make a decision and then change their mind based on the opponent players telling them to, then all credibility and respect is lost. That assistant has now lost control and the confidence of everyone, how can anyone trust his decisions again. Therefore, no change of decision would be made and it is a good job too, as it was correct and it was indeed a penalty.
Overall, we must prepare for Taylor to not be allowed to play, but hope that they see sense this time and having him back available should be looked at as a bonus, if only for the fact that our history with this has not been good.
It follows an incident in the 80th minute of Saturday’s game against Charlton Athletic on 19 January which was not seen by the match officials but caught on camera.
It is alleged the standard punishment of three matches that would otherwise apply is clearly insufficient.
Finley has until 18:00 on 23 January 2019 to respond to the charge.
Surely the EFL panel has viewed footage of the entire incident?
It couldn't fail to come to their attention.