Nemanja Matic

Spiersey

Full Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
7,386
Location
United Kingdom.
Supports
Chelsea
Why was it reduced? If it's reduced due to the nature of The tackle then surely it's a ban for Barnes. It should either have stayed at 3 or 0.
 

Orc

Pretended to be a United fan for two years
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
5,369
Supports
Chelsea
Why was it reduced? If it's reduced due to the nature of The tackle then surely it's a ban for Barnes. It should either have stayed at 3 or 0.
Reduced due to his reaction. They didn't feel the push was worthy of the full 3 matches.
 

Count Orduck

Full Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2012
Messages
7,092
Chelsea are a fecking joke :lol: It's always them. They have zero class whatsoever. They're rotten all the way through, from the board to the players to the fans.

Give it a couple of days and they'll be accusing Atkinson of racism.
 

Sly

Hang Ten
Scout
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Messages
12,299
Location
Lisbon
Supports
Sporting Clube Portugal
What games does he miss?
 

Bob Loblaw

New Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
8,979
Supports
Liverpool
Chelsea are a fecking joke :lol: It's always them. They have zero class whatsoever. They're rotten all the way through, from the board to the players to the fans.

Give it a couple of days and they'll be accusing Atkinson of racism.
The death threats will be after that, too.
 

ItsEssexRob

Has a slight gambling problem
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
11,728
Location
Essex
Supports
Chelsea
Why the feck is that ban reduced? Moo on Sky. feck right off.
2 is about right. It was stupid from Matic to react like that, and it never ceases to annoy me how people paid so much cannot control themselves for a few seconds. But anyone with a brain cell can se Barnes tackle was terrible, and that he had reason to be angry, the FA agree that's why they reduced it.
 

R'hllor

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
15,424
If there was any justice in the world, that would happen.
Reducing a Matic`s ban is not justice for him,Barnes being banned it is but you dont fight for that,you dont see any interest in that,whats important is to be able and use Matic as player as soon as possible.
 

BobbyManc

Full Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
7,750
Location
The Wall
Supports
Man City
2 is about right. It was stupid from Matic to react like that, and it never ceases to annoy me how people paid so much cannot control themselves for a few seconds. But anyone with a brain cell can se Barnes tackle was terrible, and that he had reason to be angry, the FA agree that's why they reduced it.
It's not - Roger Burden, chairman of the FA's regulatory commission, said the panel had "rejected the mitigation advanced by Nemanja Matic in respect of the provocation and tackle he received which led to his act of violent conduct".

It was only reduced because they accepted Matic's case regards the level of force he used, and where the contact was made.
 

ItsEssexRob

Has a slight gambling problem
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
11,728
Location
Essex
Supports
Chelsea
It's not - Roger Burden, chairman of the FA's regulatory commission, said the panel had "rejected the mitigation advanced by Nemanja Matic in respect of the provocation and tackle he received which led to his act of violent conduct".

It was only reduced because they accepted Matic's case regards the level of force he used, and where the contact was made.
Ok fair enough. Point still stands regarding Barnes though.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,807
Makes no sense to reduce the ban.
Agree with that.

Since when was retaliation acceptable dependant on provocation?

Why can't Barton now say his cheeky little balls tap to Huddleston isn't worth a game reduction?

Being shoved over from behind has to be more violent than that
 

BobbyManc

Full Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
7,750
Location
The Wall
Supports
Man City
Agree with that.

Since when was retaliation acceptable dependant on provocation?

Why can't Barton now say his cheeky little balls tap to Huddleston isn't worth a game reduction?

Being shoved over from behind has to be more violent than that
Read what the FA have said. The ban has been reduced because they do not feel Matic's push to be worthy of a 3-match ban. They did not take into account the tackle by Barnes.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,807
Read what the FA have said. The ban has been reduced because they do not feel Matic's push to be worthy of a 3-match ban. They did not take into account the tackle by Barnes.
They've opened a real can of worms with this one then.
I'm sure we can all remember countless incidents where something has been "violent conduct" and was nothing of the sort.

They're tweaking their own rules to passify Chelsea. Smart work from Mourinho building up the imagery that they're hard done by
 

cesc's_mullet

Get a haircut Hippy!
Joined
Apr 9, 2006
Messages
27,067
Supports
Arsenal
2 is about right. It was stupid from Matic to react like that, and it never ceases to annoy me how people paid so much cannot control themselves for a few seconds. But anyone with a brain cell can se Barnes tackle was terrible, and that he had reason to be angry, the FA agree that's why they reduced it.
Except he wasn't tackling Matic.
 

Ananke

Full Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2014
Messages
1,438
Location
Manchester
Reduction? Honestly...

Not worthy of 3 matches...hahaha. God, the FA will bend far too easily. Even if it's 1 match less, they shouldnt have done that. Shows weakness to mourinho's crying.
 

wolvored

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
10,021
Mourinho knows him inside out so perhaps its better the devil you know? Fabinho Bakayoko etc could come and end up the next Depay for all we know. Perhaps that's why hes after Dier, another proven player in the premiership