Norwich 3 v Wolves 1 - not the game we wanted verdict thread

[FrankMunro-371]

Wolves have appealed against Ikeme's red card.

 

[The Bear]

Not surprising.

 

[Kenny]

Be surprised if we win the appeal tbh

 

[Tony Towner]

No chance, it's an interpretation decision and unless there are other camera angles the one on the highlights doesn't show him exaggerating the push by falling over as claimed by Ikeme.
From reading up on it, convention says the face is a red, the chest a yellow, but the law doesn't distinguish like that.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

I envisage the conversation between the F.A., and the referee will go along the lines of:

F.A. - Wolverhampton Wanderers have appealed against the red card given to Carl Ikeme in last Saturday's game against Norwich City. Have you anything further to add to your report?

Referee - No, as I mentioned in my report I sent him off for pushing an opponent with excessive force.

F.A. - Wolves are not denying that Ikeme pushed an opponent, but they are saying excessive force was not used.

Referee - in my opinion it was.

Given that scenario it will then be up to the disciplinary panel to decide if excessive force was used. It will be a difficult one to overturn, but you never know.

 

[Tredman]

I envisage the conversation between the F.A., and the referee will go along the lines of:

F.A. - Wolverhampton Wanderers have appealed against the red card given to Carl Ikeme in last Saturday's game against Norwich City. Have you anything further to add to your report?

Referee - No, as I mentioned in my report I sent him off for pushing an opponent with excessive force.

F.A. - Wolves are not denying that Ikeme pushed an opponent, but they are saying excessive force was not used.

Referee - in my opinion it was.

Given that scenario it will then be up to the disciplinary panel to decide if excessive force was used. It will be a difficult one to overturn, but you never know.

What about the penalty? Will anything be said to the referee for handing out a pen instead of booking the player for diving?

 

[Kenny]

So the ref on Saturday also reffed our game at Villa Park. He did us in that one as well.

 

[jd1981]

So the ref on Saturday also reffed our game at Villa Park. He did us in that one as well.

Seriously? His display that day was one of the most incompetent referring performance's I've ever seen.

 

[Premier Quality]

He was all round awful against Norwich, not just on the dive/push incident.

 

[Parkins left foot]

I am assuming that if the appeal is turned down then there is a risk of extending the ban - hope that the club is suitably confident of overturning it then

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

It is highly unlikely to be viewed as frivolous so I don't envisage the ban being extended at all. I also don't see any way whatsoever that the ban will be overturned.

As soon as the ref says it was excessive force there has to be extremely compelling evidence that it wasn't to get through the panel.

 

[Penk Wolf]

Spot the forum (ex) member.

:facepalm:

 

[Premier Quality]

What is it with wolves fans and banners?

 

[Alan]

I'm confused. Why is the original ref involved in the appeal process at all?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 

[VanWolfie]

I'm confused. Why is the original ref involved in the appeal process at all?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

He's not, Alan. It is the disciplinary committee that makes the judgment but they can ask the referee to clarify anything they think will help them better understand the situation as it unfolded. Hence, you have the referee's version and the club's appeal and the committee must decide which version of events is more accurately in keeping with the appropriate laws.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Well. They must decide, taking the appellants evidence into account, whether the referees interpretation was so outlandish that it should be amended.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

He's not, Alan. It is the disciplinary committee that makes the judgment but they can ask the referee to clarify anything they think will help them better understand the situation as it unfolded. Hence, you have the referee's version and the club's appeal and the committee must decide which version of events is more accurately in keeping with the appropriate laws.

Indeed. Having served on disciplinary committees, the first thing that happens is the referees report is read out, the referee then has the opportunity to confirm or amend his original report. At county level the referee will be present, at national level he will be contacted by e mail. In this case, with it being at national level, footage of the incident will be studied before a decision is made whether to uphold the appeal. Of course, the referee might just say that he made a mistake and it should have been a yellow card. Highly unlikely though.

For Ikeme to win, the disciplinary panel must agree with him that he did not use excessive force. Personally I do not think he will win, it would mean overruling a referees opinion, as the law in question states " if in the opinion of the referee excessive force is used."

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

And they are only going to overrule a referee on a matter of opinion if no qualified referee, with access to the evidence, would rationally hold the opinion that this was excessive force.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

And they are only going to overrule a referee on a matter of opinion if no qualified referee, with access to the evidence, would rationally hold the opinion that this was excessive force.

Indeed they could, but it would be unusual if that happens. What one person considers to be excessive force may not seem so to another person.

I was never satisfied when the wording was amended to include excessive force. It is open to ambiguity.

 

[darlowolf64]

Some extra highlights from the Norwich City youtube site...Complete with totally unbiased commentary