• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Entertainment
  • Football
Chelsea Supporters Thread (Part 5)
<<
<
86 of 352
>>
>
dend
22-02-2015
The red was deserved, he lashed out and had to go, even if the challenge before was probably also a red. Amazed he never got a yellow at the very least...

A poor performance but we should have won even with the sending off, defenitly should have had atleast one penalty.

Oh well, its not the end of the world, we were never going to win all our remaining games, slipping up will happen. We just have to not slip up as much as Man City
Butterflies
22-02-2015
Originally Posted by bri160356:
“Alan Shearer has berated Barnes’ over his ‘terrible tackle’ on Matic.

However, I think he is wrong.

Barnes shielded the ball from Zouma, turned and took the ball upfield a few yards using a touch with his right foot. The ball was effectively under his control.

He then took 3 steps and passed the ball, at speed!, with the inside of his right foot, up the line toward the Chelsea goal.

Barnes has clearly kicked the ball, and it has clearly left his boot.

Matic is moving in on the ball, at speed, from Barnes’ left; he intercepts Barnes’ pass with outstretched left leg.

The ball hit the toe of Matics’ boot and goes out for a throw-in.

The ball is about 2-feet away from Barnes’ boot after he’d passed it forward, when the ball strikes Matics’ toe; Barnes’ forward momentum, after hitting the ball upfield, takes him into Matics shin.

It all happened so fast it is hard to see how Barnes could have stopped the collision once he’d passed the ball forward.

He appeared to be fully concentrated on making a successful pass upfield rather than attempting to break Matics’ leg.

Matic’s red card was fully deserved; however, one can fully understand the reaction if he genuinely believed Barnes’ was trying to deliberately him injure him.

I’ve watched this incident numerous times in slow-motion; Barnes had definitely made a pass (albeit intercepted) along the line. He didn’t go ‘over the top’ and it’s difficult to see how the collision was avoidable.

Am I a voice in the wilderness? ”

Barnes was fouling our players all game; take a look at the Ivanovic and Zouma incident. Sorry, I don't buy that this was an accident at all. In all incidents he knew full well what he was doing; even if it was just a case of him leaving his boot, you only have to look at the way Matic's leg was bending as the contact was made which implies there was significant (excessive) force applied by Barnes.
bri160356
22-02-2015
Originally Posted by RichmondBlue:
“The key appears to be how you interpret the coming together of foot and shin, probably best seen at 40/41 seconds into this video..

http://youtu.be/e852UDSWgTk

I know it all happens very quickly in real time, but Barnes definitely leaves his foot in. I tend to think that experienced professional footballers know full well what they're doing even at speed. It may not have been intentional, but Barnes made no attempt to prevent it either. So, I can't agree with you..but I do see your point.”

Fair comment my friend.

I personally think it’s very difficult to interpret either way in fairness.

As you say it happens very fast; I’m still erring on the side of ‘unintentional’ as once his right boot has started on its trajectory a collision seems unavoidable.

Could Barnes have mitigated the impact?.....

..yes/probably/possibly/no.......take your pick!

I wonder if he'll tell us the truth.
codeblue
23-02-2015
After two days to digest the incidents of Saturday, my conclusion is

The ref was not able to competently referee the game and should be suspended.

The ref in not showing authority, allowed Barnes to continually increase the ferocity of his tackles

Matic reaction to the tackle was understandable, and it will be interesting if Chelsea appeal the card

matic is the luckiest player, out for three games instead of a potentially career ending leg break. I would have been devastated for him, and The team.
carefree_blue
23-02-2015
Looks like we are appealing the Matic sending off. Interesting, I didn't think we would.

Incidentally if Barnes gets a retrospective ban, Man City will benefit as one of Burnley's next three opponents.
The_don1
23-02-2015
We did not play well, Not sure if it was "Champions League Hangover" as we have suffered with that sometimes or if it was something else.

The Ref was awful but that's just the standard of ref's today. It is a hard job and yes things happen at speed but mistakes like the handball have nothing to do with speed or not seeing things they are just unacceptable mistakes at this level. Its a tough job but lots of jobs are tough but you still needed to be held to a certain level, The "They get most calls right" just cannot cut it with ones like this, They need to get the easy ones right 10/10 as that's the level they are at
codeblue
23-02-2015
Originally Posted by carefree_blue:
“Looks like we are appealing the Matic sending off. Interesting, I didn't think we would.

Incidentally if Barnes gets a retrospective ban, Man City will benefit as one of Burnley's next three opponents.”

That's the ridiculous thing about bans, if a player gets a red card in the 90th minute it can be worse for the opposition!

As to getting a card in a pl match keeping you out of an unrelated cup final, that's madness.
Phil Ander
23-02-2015
The problem I have here is that by solely blaming match officials for dropping points, Jose effectively avoids answering questions about some sub standard team performances. I think in particular the games at Southampton and Spurs. In the Saints match Chelsea failed to muster one shot on target in the second half despite having the lions share of the ball.

The other point I would make is that some of the decisions Jose claims are slam dunk are disputed by others. On commentary for instance Jonathan Pearce reckoned it would have been harsh to award the hand ball one though he did think the Diego Costa one should have been given. I am not saying Pearce is right just that many decisions are debateable.

And away from Chelsea Brendan Rogers thought the ref had a good game at St Mary's yesterday. Others including me disagreed.

This is a problem with technology. A lot of decisions are in the opinion of the ref as distinct from statements of fact.
Butterflies
23-02-2015
Originally Posted by Phil Ander:
“The problem I have here is that by solely blaming match officials for dropping points, Jose effectively avoids answering questions about some sub standard team performances. I think in particular the games at Southampton and Spurs. In the Saints match Chelsea failed to muster one shot on target in the second half despite having the lions share of the ball.

The other point I would make is that some of the decisions Jose claims are slam dunk are disputed by others. On commentary for instance Jonathan Pearce reckoned it would have been harsh to award the hand ball one though he did think the Diego Costa one should have been given. I am not saying Pearce is right just that many decisions are debateable.

And away from Chelsea Brendan Rogers thought the ref had a good game at St Mary's yesterday. Others including me disagreed.

This is a problem with technology. A lot of decisions are in the opinion of the ref as distinct from statements of fact.”

By the same token, a team's performance should have no bearing on the standard of officiating. If we get in a scoring position (like Ivan v Burnley), or we are in a position to create a chance (Cesc vs Southampton) and player X commits a foul outside the laws of the game, then is should be punished; how we played 30, 60 or 70 minutes before that is irrelevant.

According to Jose, Atkinson didn't see any of the incidents he mentioned which only highlights how poor the standard of officiating has become. There will always be an element of judgement in decisions, but the fact that referee's don't have the capacity to see the sort of decisions they should be casting a judgement on is even worse - and that's where video technology can be a huge benefit to the game.
NinjyBear
23-02-2015
Thorgan Hazard has signed for Gladbach.
carefree_blue
23-02-2015
The FA have confirmed they are taking no action over Barnes' challenge. Why am I not surprised? It's understandable why Mourinho feels so frustrated.
Butterflies
23-02-2015
What???? The incident was seen? But Jose said he spoke to Atkinson and he said that he didn't seen any of the incidents.
RichmondBlue
23-02-2015
Originally Posted by Phil Ander:
“The problem I have here is that by solely blaming match officials for dropping points, Jose effectively avoids answering questions about some sub standard team performances. I think in particular the games at Southampton and Spurs. In the Saints match Chelsea failed to muster one shot on target in the second half despite having the lions share of the ball.

The other point I would make is that some of the decisions Jose claims are slam dunk are disputed by others. On commentary for instance Jonathan Pearce reckoned it would have been harsh to award the hand ball one though he did think the Diego Costa one should have been given. I am not saying Pearce is right just that many decisions are debateable.

And away from Chelsea Brendan Rogers thought the ref had a good game at St Mary's yesterday. Others including me disagreed.

This is a problem with technology. A lot of decisions are in the opinion of the ref as distinct from statements of fact.”

I would normally agree with you, but I do think Saturday's game was one of those occasions where the standard of refereeing was so bad it overshadowed everything else.
To be honest, I can't remember much else about the game myself. I thought it was two clear penalties before half time, and Burnley should have been down to ten men before the Matic incident. It was one of those (thankfully) rare occasions where the football appeared secondary to the mind-blowing incompetence of the official in charge.
RichmondBlue
23-02-2015
Originally Posted by carefree_blue:
“The FA have confirmed they are taking no action over Barnes' challenge. Why am I not surprised? It's understandable why Mourinho feels so frustrated.”

I'm not surprised ether. You can bet the Matic ban will still stand though.
We go on about FIFA and Blatter, but the game stinks just as much here.
Butterflies
23-02-2015
Originally Posted by RichmondBlue:
“I'm not surprised ether. You can bet the Matic ban will still stand though.
We go on about FIFA and Blatter, but the game stinks just as much here.”

I haven't been this mad since the Aguero two-footed stamp on Luiz in the FA Cup. Since Foy "saw" the incident there was no retrospective action taken and it seems to be the same case for Matic. But when it came to Costa, of course no-one saw it and he was banned for 3 games. I'm not trying to infer there is some campaign against Chelsea but the downright incompetence of the FA is beyond a joke now. This is why video technology needs to be implemented so there can be NO doubt about what the referee saw or didn't see.
RichmondBlue
23-02-2015
Originally Posted by Butterflies:
“I haven't been this mad since the Aguero two-footed stamp on Luiz in the FA Cup. Since Foy "saw" the incident there was no retrospective action taken and it seems to be the same case for Matic. But when it came to Costa, of course no-one saw it and he was banned for 3 games. I'm not trying to infer there is some campaign against Chelsea but the downright incompetence of the FA is beyond a joke now. This is why video technology needs to be implemented so there can be NO doubt about what the referee saw or didn't see.”

Presumably Atkinson must have said he saw the tackle and considered no action needed to be taken against Barnes ? If that's the case Atkinson should be sacked immediately. It's one thing to miss something, that's understandable. But quite another to admit that you saw a potentially career ending challenge, but came to the conclusion no action was necessary.
They can't have it all ways, either the referee didn't see it clearly and the FA should take retrospective action. Or the referee saw it and was guilty of a serious and gross error of judgement. In which case he should be disciplined at the very least.
Butterflies
23-02-2015
Originally Posted by RichmondBlue:
“Presumably Atkinson must have said he saw the tackle and considered no action needed to be taken against Barnes ? If that's the case Atkinson should be sacked immediately. It's one thing to miss something, that's understandable. But quite another to admit that you saw a potentially career ending challenge, but came to the conclusion no action was necessary.
They can't have it all ways, either the referee didn't see it clearly and the FA should take retrospective action. Or the referee saw it and was guilty of a serious and gross error of judgement. In which case he should be disciplined at the very least.”

You're speaking too much sense RichmondBlue. In an ideal world, your suggestion would be implemented but I have little hope of this materialising.
RichmondBlue
23-02-2015
At least someone has got it right..

"Former referees' chief Keith Hackett believes Atkinson needs a rest after describing his performance in the game as 'incompetent' ".

A permanent rest I would have thought.
SegaGamer
23-02-2015
He has to be lying. Surely no ref should be allowed to keep their job if they say that wasn't a sending off offense.

I see that they have completely ignored the 1st one on Ivanovic which was violent conduct. Is Atkinson saying he seen that one too is he ?

Also, i thought the rules changed after that challenge from Callum McManaman ? The new rules say that even if the ref see's it the F.A can still take actions. What the hell is going on here ?

This is a disgrace and i am sick of the way we are getting treated.
Butterflies
23-02-2015
Originally Posted by SegaGamer:
“He has to be lying. Surely no ref should be allowed to keep their job if they say that wasn't a sending off offense.

I see that they have completely ignored the 1st one on Ivanovic which was violent conduct. Is Atkinson saying he seen that one too is he ?

Also, i thought the rules changed after that challenge from Callum McManaman ? The new rules say that even if the ref see's it the F.A can still take actions. What the hell is going on here ?

This is a disgrace and i am sick of the way we are getting treated.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ip-rFwIeIeg#t=1402

From 23:22 - 24:22

Jose says that Atkinson didn't see anything.
RichmondBlue
23-02-2015
In other news, I see Thorgan Hazard has gone to Borussia Monchengladbach permanently.
We get a transfer fee of 8m Euros, but have a buy-back clause inserted as well.
I think he had been saying that he thought his chances at Chelsea were limited, and he felt unsettled on loan. So perhaps it's in everyone's best interests. If he does fulfil his promise in the future, we should be able to buy him back at a reasonable price.
toastie15
23-02-2015
If Rooney or Costa made that challenge the uproar would have been far worse and the FA would have acted!
codeblue
23-02-2015
The fa are clearly no longer fit for purpose. They are just as bad as Fifa.

They hide behind the rules when it suits them, and change them for others.
RichmondBlue
23-02-2015
Originally Posted by codeblue:
“The fa are clearly no longer fit for purpose. They are just as bad as Fifa.

They hide behind the rules when it suits them, and change them for others.”

That's true. The FA have really excelled themselves with this one. Mealy-mouthed cowards is just one of the descriptions I've read about them. They really are beyond useless, a total waste of space.
If there's one good thing to come out of this, it's that even the majority of non-Chelsea fans appear to be shocked by this decision. I've been reading the readers replies on some newspaper articles online, and apart from a few confirmed Chelsea haters, most are firmly behind us on this one.
Not that it will do us much good, public loathing and contempt won't rid the game of these self-serving parasites..look at FIFA.
codeblue
23-02-2015
The fa is a closed shop, looking after its own self serving interests.

If the ref saw that and decided it wasn't even a card, then he is not fit to officiate. If he did not see it, then according to the rules it can be looked at on video.

Which is it fa? Instead they have chosen to bury their head and become yet another laughing stock.
<<
<
86 of 352
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map