That's true. And considering Barnes made full contact with Matic and zero damage was done tells you there was not much force in the challenge. It wasn't just luck that Matic escaped serious injury, it was basically because the challenge did not have the impact behind it to cause anything significant, bar a freak incident.
Nemanja Matic
- Thread starter Baxter
- Start date
That's true. And considering Barnes made full contact with Matic and zero damage was done tells you there was not much force in the challenge. It wasn't just luck that Matic escaped serious injury, it was basically because the challenge did not have the impact behind it to cause anything significant, bar a freak incident.
Cahill got away with a yellow after making a similarly dangerous tackle on Sanchez earlier in the season and there wasn't this much kerfuffle. These challenges happen, the players who make them deserve to be sent off, but you can't go around assaulting people as retribution.
Exactly. I'd guess at least once every matchday weekend in the Premier League you'll see a minimum of one challenge worse or as bad as the one by Barnes. Matic is an idiot for reacting the way he did, it's as simple as that.
"assault" Yeah, OK, that's what Matic did.
I think im watching the wrong video from some of the posts on here.
He plays, or tries, to play a pass, matic tackles, then there's a follow through from the leg that happens to hit matic from the direct it does. Where is the intent here?
Some of you need to get a grip. Reaction from matic should be a yellow, but the aggression and intent from him is all there, unlike barnes, so a red is justifiable..
He plays, or tries, to play a pass, matic tackles, then there's a follow through from the leg that happens to hit matic from the direct it does. Where is the intent here?
Some of you need to get a grip. Reaction from matic should be a yellow, but the aggression and intent from him is all there, unlike barnes, so a red is justifiable..
It's not rocket science, you don't go in that high unless you are trying to hurt someone. No better or worse then the Roy Keane one
I'm with you, but apparently we are in the wrong.
Just listened to Sean Dyche's post-match interview and he makes a good point that Matic is the only person who reacts to the challenge. Not a single other Chelsea player reacts, nor do the fans. So although you can argue retrospective punishment for Barnes, the criticism of Atkinson for that particular incident is perhaps unmerited.
But he says he saw it at the time. If he's seen the dangerous play then he'd have said he'd haven given Barnes a red card.
Not how it works as far as I'm aware. If they see the incident and are aware of it then that counts as them seeing it, even if in real-time they were not aware of the severity of the challenge. Everyone saw what Barnes did, but live during the game no one seemed to realise just how nasty a challenge it was. It's only if it's 'exceptional circumstances' that they will act retrospectively on an incident the referee saw.
Excellent, balanced analysis from Sean Dyche.
I like Sean Dyche.
You're totally missing the point. Plenty of players get kicked. Some players get persistently fouled week in and week out and don't lose their temper. Skill players suffer all the time - often by physical players like Matic, and manage not to get sent off.
And they are perfectly entitled to appeal - I didn't say they weren't. For me the issue here is that any interpretation which gets him off the hook opens up a line of argument which becomes a slippery slope. If its fine to retaliate what constitutes a fair response? Or how long after a bad tackle is it ok? It becomes a nonsense.
Bottom line for me is that what he did was a red card offence. The referee applied the rules correctly. The fact that Barnes should have seen red as well is not relevant - although he should be punished. That though is a different argument.
Regardless of standards of refereeing you can't have players policing the game. This isn't ice hockey. Any softening of these rules allows a nasty side to creep in which does nothing for skill levels. I don't see that the answer to bad refereeing is to give players licence to run around kicking each other up in the air if they don't like a tackle. It's only going to make their jobs harder.
And perhaps if players were a bit more honest rather than trying to con refs constantly then perhaps they'd find it easier to recognise bad tackles from players making a meal of things. Although not relevant here it's an issue which cuts both ways.
Last edited:
I don't think there's any malice involved from Barnes. If I'm playing football and I'm going in for a challenge, some times I'll leave a foot in, not to hurt them but to annoy them/make your presence felt. I think that's what he did but clearly he went over the top and should have been sent off. Given he was going for the pass initially though, I see why some don't think he meant it.
Tough one to prove, but the fact he gets up and immediately walks the other way makes me think he knew what he was doing. If you accidentally bend someones leg back like that, then you're natural reaction would be to see if they are ok, then apologize.
That clip might even deserve it's own thread. Good stuff.
Also, am I the only one thinking that's exactly the sort of interview a ref could give? I mean, there's nothing groundbreaking in it, but he does well to explain the situation and why the initial call was made. Even if you disagree with the call, it makes sense for the reasons he mention. I honestly think it'd help the refs, because by shutting up we can only make assumptions about their capability.
Very good from Dyche.
I think they should, or at least a representative should review all the contentious decisions and explain them at the end of the round.
We have that on one of the dedicated Sports Radio programs here in Melbourne, for the AFL. The head of the umpires association comes on every week and goes over the decisions - sometimes they even allow for random callers to call in and discuss the decisions too.
Me too... I find him very likeable. I hope they avoid the drop as it will be quite an achievement from him and Burnley.
He appeared the same sports station I mentioned above at the start of the season and he was very realistic, likeable and was interesting to listen to.
Brilliant from Dyche.
Good from Dyche, the only thing I will say on the Barnes/Matic incident is that is it normal for a player to play a pass and then their leg end up studs up following through like that? Not saying he meant it, but its VERY weird.
Yeah, that sounds great. The biggest fear by some is that it'd undermine the referee's authority, but I honestly can't understand that argument.
Like I've mentioned before on this board in other threads referees in Denmark occasionally come out and comment on a dubious decision after a game. Sometimes they'll apologise for flat out making the wrong call, sometimes they'll accept that it was the wrong call, but explain why they made it, and sometimes they'll explain the rules and why it was the right call. Again, nothing groundbreaking and you could have "experts" doing the same thing in the studio, but it just adds more value hearing it from the ref.
As it is right now, we can only assume that refs are gigantic idiots whenever they miss a call that seems so blatant to the viewer. Dyche does very well in explaining how the call made sense as it happened. With a little media training there's no reason why any ref couldn't do that or, as you suggest, a representative of sorts.
This has been suggested before and I think referee's would probably like to be able to explain their decisions after a game. Also, if they've made a mistake they can say so and it half diffuses the situation.
For whatever reason it seems that the powers that be don't want to allow this and I can't understand why. Ref's will make mistakes just like players do. I can't see how this would do anything other than help people at least understand why a decision was made.
Just saw the complete clip of the tackle. Barnes was trying to pass. How do people label that as a tackle?! And it was in the follow through that his foot hit Matic.
I like how he kinda looks like a mix of Louis CK and a guy that would supervise the bouncers of a nightclub in Birmingham.
The 'only' thing that looks odd in the mix of things is the way barnes reacts to it. Everything looks to be just an unfortunate situation. But you would think he's seen/felt what he's done and realise how dangerous it could have been if more force was applied. However rather than check on matic he almost 180s immediately with his head down...i cant see anything else in it though.
Well Matic kinda felt vividly so him reacting to it is natural, the way he did though wasn't intelligent.
Saying Barnes deserves a red for that is like saying Nani deserved that red vs madrid.
That Dyche statement / interview / response is excellent!
It's not a black or white situation. Barnes makes the pass but leaves his leg in slyly. It's never going to have the force to break anyone's leg. It's mainly about protecting yourself and leaving a wee bit extra in for the other player. It's the sort of niggly dirty stuff that usually escapes the cameras but is fairly standard in the game.
Its got pretty much feck all to do with Matic and his appeal though, its a response to Jose's post match comments.
What did Dyche say, I can't view the video
It's not a short clip and he discusses all the situations that Mourinho numerically mentioned. He comes across very well. I never had the impression of him that he is a talker, but he is really impressive.
As for the Matic situation he said that noone actually saw it and thought a big deal of it except for Matic. He said that after rewatching it, it looked terrible. But he also stated that Barnes was in a natural passing movement and he couldn't say for himself whether he overdid it there, because he isn't an expert on biomechanics (something like that).
So he basically gave his view of the situation.
Nice interview from Dyche, he makes some good points.
It's still a nailed on red card for Barnes though.
It's still a nailed on red card for Barnes though.
http://www.chelseafc.com/news/lates...appalled-with-the-fa-s-decision-on-matic.html
Chelsea are an embarrassment of an organisation. Somehow they get the ban reduced and they still have the audacity to complain further ffs.
Chelsea are an embarrassment of an organisation. Somehow they get the ban reduced and they still have the audacity to complain further ffs.
Why the feck is that ban reduced? Moo on Sky. feck right off.
I'm surprised myself that those idiots reduced the suspension. Unfortunately for us that he still misses 2 massive matches.
