FA Favouring the Big Boys

[John Boy Saint]

I expect this to get moved as the only tenuous link to Saints is that Tyrone Mings will miss the game against us in April. But as we have another weekend off no harm in sticking an interlude into the normal run of things to discuss.

 

Am I alone in thinking that a bit of favouritism has crept into the punishments handed out by the FA to Ibrahimovic and Mings after the rough and tumble of the Man U v Cherries game on Saturday. If anything I think the match bans served up are back to front.

You could debate until the cows come home whether Mings trod on the head Ibrahimovic on purpose. Having just been in a tussle resulting in a heap of bodies on the floor, the decision to tread on his head is not going to be a premeditated act, more of an opportunity presenting itself: if it was Mings intent.

On the flip side the Elbow in the face Mings from Ibrahimovic has to be a worse offence as it has to have been premeditated, Ibrahimovic knew who was at his shoulder and the act of elbowing Mings was, as most people could see, a deliberate action to get him back having had a while to wait for he opportunity.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39210644

[Graffito]

The elbow was clearly deliberate and probably, as you say, premeditated. I think it's impossible to say whether the stamp on the head was either deliberate or premeditated and I don't know how the FA could be so certain. Even if the FA were clear that the Mings "offence" was deliberate, how would they account for the difference in punishments. Who can say it's favouritism or just a poor decision. Given Bournemouth's position in the league I can see why they are so annoyed with the decision. It could cost them dearly.

[East Kent Saint]

Seen at normal speed it looked very much like an accident , Mings was trying to jump over Rooney and Ibra.... in the aftermatch interviews both players said stuff happens and they were happy to leave it at that so it could mean they both meant it and wanted to get away with it !!!

[redkeith]

I was suprised that Zlatan got a ban at all, as I thought that the FA would hide behind the fact that Friend spoke to Zlatan and say that the ref had dealt with the incident. Some commentators were suggesting that Zlatan wouldn't have had the chance to retaliate if Mings had been sent off, but then you could also suggest that Zlatan should have been booked in the first half for through Mings to the ground.

 

Still there is nothing new in this. I think if you were to keep a diary of these type of incidents you would see a similar, if not worse bias. I can remember Fergies last game at West Brom, when they lost 5.4 . For one of the Albion goals you could ckearky see a United player punch on of the Albion forwards as he ran past him. No disciplinary action for that one.

[kelkel31]

Cant argue with you points as to premeditation and favouritism but they do play to the notion the either the FA or football as a whole is a well reasoned well run organisation. With the government getting involved with how the governing football bodies in this country are structured and run (something i believe is prohibited by FIFA rules ) we can safely say they are neither well reasoned or well run.

 

Also it is a well know fact that the simple act of admitting you were wrong and saying sorry (no, there is no evidence in which he alludes that Mings ran into his elbow ) saves you from the further 2 games punishment given out to Mings.

[Saint Troy]

From watching on MOTD it was frustrating - they kept showing the close up slow mo. If you watch the revers angle at full speed it really does look like he is trying to get up and chase where the balls going. No way that you can prove thats deliberate and no a ban in my opinion. Zlatan couldve blinded him with the deliberate elbow, if hes carded retrospectively because its deliberate 3 games is a lucky break.

[doddisalegend]

Mings incident looked like an accident to me no way for anyone (other than Mings) to be sure for definite.

Zlatan on the other hand was deliberate and obvious. Zlatan was a ban in my opinion because of that. Mings should have been given the benefit of the doubt and you feel probably would have if he was wearing a man u shirt...

[red&white56]

For me Mings deserved the ban. He was not chasing the ball, he had time to see what was in front of him. He took the opportunity to have a go at Zlatan. What's disappointing are the huge protests from the Cherries about how innocent he is.

 

Are the bans unbalanced, yes this point I agree with.

[VectisSaint]

I expect this to get moved as the only tenuous link to Saints is that Tyrone Mings will miss the game against us in April. But as we have another weekend off no harm in sticking an interlude into the normal run of things to discuss.

He is also a former Saint, so not completely tenuous.

It is so clearly an accident, it is disgusting that the FA have given him a 5 match ban, with no right of appeal.

The Ibra ban should be for the games previously scheduled, that would mean he would miss our game, but now he won't.

[angelman]

What about Zlatan's stamp on Mings? That seems to have been ignored. Having preceded the "stamp" on the head, it might be relevant as it could be seen that Mings was getting retribution.

[Professor]

I'd have given Ibrahimovic another three match ban for the blatant cheating in order to get a player sent off by dropping to the ground when he was pushed in the chest by Surman. If the card was just for the push, huge numbers of players should be booked or sent off for pushing each other after incidents. I don't believe the ref would have punished Surman if the cheat hadn't pretended to fall over. It would be worrying if a ref tried to avoid the publicity from dealing with a household name compared to punishing your average player.

[trousers]

What about Zlatan's stamp on Mings? That seems to have been ignored.

 

Was just about to mention that. It's quite clear from this footage: https://twitter.com/foulthrownet/status/839068784224784384 that Ibrahimovic was trying to stamp on Mings with his trailing leg.

 

Regarding the Mings stamp, its impossible to tell 'beyond reasonable doubt' whether Mings intended it, so quite why the powers that be have different 'proof' criteria to a court of law is beyond me.

[Sour Mash]

The elbow was clearly deliberate and probably, as you say, premeditated. I think it's impossible to say whether the stamp on the head was either deliberate or premeditated and I don't know how the FA could be so certain. Even if the FA were clear that the Mings "offence" was deliberate, how would they account for the difference in punishments. Who can say it's favouritism or just a poor decision. Given Bournemouth's position in the league I can see why they are so annoyed with the decision. It could cost them dearly.

I agree. Also demonstrates why a video ref at the game wouldn't have worked.

[Hatch]

I'm not sure Zlatan will be fit for our game, after that violent push on him by Surman that made him collapse , I will be surprised if he ever walks again. Bless him the poor flower.

[Gorgiesaint]

For me Mings deserved the ban. He was not chasing the ball, he had time to see what was in front of him. He took the opportunity to have a go at Zlatan. What's disappointing are the huge protests from the Cherries about how innocent he is.

 

Are the bans unbalanced, yes this point I agree with.

 

You need to watch the incident again then, as after Mings jumps over Zlatan and Rooney, he is the first person to touch the ball. That is why I don't think Mings intended to stamp on Zlatan.

[sadoldgit]

I think Mings has been hard done by. He was looking away seemed to be trying to clear the huddle. Very hard to prove intent from the footage. Not so hard to prove intent from Ibrahimovic so why does one get 3 matches and the other 5?

[Turkish]

I think Mings has been hard done by. He was looking away seemed to be trying to clear the huddle. Very hard to prove intent from the footage. Not so hard to prove intent from Ibrahimovic so why does one get 3 matches and the other 5?

 

Ibrahimovich pleaded guilty and Mings didn't for one.

 

Look at the reaction of Mings, if it was an accident he wasn't exactly rushing to Ibrahimovich to check he was okay after "accidently" stamping on his head like any innocent person would do.

 

Both were deliberate, both were guilty and both would have got the same ban if they'd both entered the same plea. Quite how people can put this down as big club favouritism is crazy.

[AK]

both would have got the same ban if they'd both entered the same plea. Quite how people can put this down as big club favouritism is crazy.

 

That's not correct, Mings was not given an extra two game ban for pleading not guilty or whatever the terminology is.

 

The FA Stated before hearing his plea that the three game ban would be insufficient punishment if found guilty. The additional ban some times used for frivolous appeals was not used in this instance.

[John Boy Saint]

Ibrahimovich pleaded guilty and Mings didn't for one.

 

Look at the reaction of Mings, if it was an accident he wasn't exactly rushing to Ibrahimovich to check he was okay after "accidently" stamping on his head like any innocent person would do.

 

Both were deliberate, both were guilty and both would have got the same ban if they'd both entered the same plea. Quite how people can put this down as big club favouritism is crazy.

 

The Bournemouth statement does say that Mings apologised to Ibrahimovic twice after the incident.

[meatball]

The whole episode as I see it is a disgrace. There are multiple incidents surrounding this that the authorities have ignored, and the punishments handed out have gone the opposite of how they should.

 

The way I saw each incident as it happened with my % certainty on the accuracy of each statement.

 

1. Zlatan attempts to stamp on Mings leg whilst he jumps over a challenge by Mings on Rooney. 85% certain

 

2. Zlatan immediately feigns injury in an attempt to get a card for Mings or to counter suspicion of his stamp on Mings. 85% certain

 

Mings attempts to jump over Zlatan to reach the ball and seemingly attempts to stamp on his head at the same time 55% Certain

 

Zlatan gains revenge for alleged stamp by forcefully elbowing Mings in the face during an aerial dual. 99.99% certain

 

Surmon reacts the way most teammate would and confronts Zlatan, in the process slightly pushing him in the chest, with nowhere near enough force to knock a child over, let alone arguable one of the most physically imposing players in the league. 90% certain

 

Zlatan falls over after being "pushed" by Surmon in a deliberate attempt to get the player sent off.

 

If the above is even close to being accurate then the ensuing punishments handed out are pathetic and shameful.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dr. Kucho]

Barcelona were done massive favour yesterday by UEFA or whoever gave the ref that brown paper bag..

[The9]

I expect this to get moved as the only tenuous link to Saints is that Tyrone Mings will miss the game against us in April. But as we have another weekend off no harm in sticking an interlude into the normal run of things to discuss.

 

Am I alone in thinking that a bit of favouritism has crept into the punishments handed out by the FA to Ibrahimovic and Mings after the rough and tumble of the Man U v Cherries game on Saturday. If anything I think the match bans served up are back to front.

You could debate until the cows come home whether Mings trod on the head Ibrahimovic on purpose. Having just been in a tussle resulting in a heap of bodies on the floor, the decision to tread on his head is not going to be a premeditated act, more of an opportunity presenting itself: if it was Mings intent.

On the flip side the Elbow in the face Mings from Ibrahimovic has to be a worse offence as it has to have been premeditated, Ibrahimovic knew who was at his shoulder and the act of elbowing Mings was, as most people could see, a deliberate action to get him back having had a while to wait for he opportunity.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39210644

 

I hadn't seen that Mings had been banned for 5 matches, but it's absolutely ridiculous. No way the FA could confirm intent for that, and it didn't look like he did it on purpose - he glanced but everyone moved after that and before he put his foot down, and he put his foot exactly where you'd expect him to have if falling over normally.

 

Meanwhile, Zlatan threw a deliberate elbow (which is a three match ban even if it's accidental and damage results) AND trod on Mings deliberately just before, and gets two games fewer. Absolutely awful decision. Not sure how Surman lightly pushing someone in the chest is a yellow either, and fairly sure he wouldn't have got it if the ref realised he'd already been booked.

Edited 9 March, 2017 by The9

[The9]

The Bournemouth statement does say that Mings apologised to Ibrahimovic twice after the incident.

 

You can apologise for something whether accidental or deliberate. I once hoofed someone up the ar5e off the ball at a corner once, totally premeditated, completely lost it for a second and apologised to the guy immediately. I've also left a foot in on someone doing a sliding tackle on me purely because they were about to wipe me out, and not said anything.

 

As for Zlatan's elbow, after the "stamp" he looked to see who'd done it when still lying down, then pursued him into the box for the corner that followed, even before they went up for the header together.

[The9]

I'd have given Ibrahimovic another three match ban for the blatant cheating in order to get a player sent off by dropping to the ground when he was pushed in the chest by Surman. If the card was just for the push, huge numbers of players should be booked or sent off for pushing each other after incidents. I don't believe the ref would have punished Surman if the cheat hadn't pretended to fall over. It would be worrying if a ref tried to avoid the publicity from dealing with a household name compared to punishing your average player.

 

He could have got a few cards for simulation in the EFL Cup Final as well.

[Turkish]

That's not correct, Mings was not given an extra two game ban for pleading not guilty or whatever the terminology is.

 

The FA Stated before hearing his plea that the three game ban would be insufficient punishment if found guilty. The additional ban some times used for frivolous appeals was not used in this instance.

 

You don't know how it works do you. You don't get extra punishment for not pleading guilty, you get credit for pleading guilty, ie admitting what you did was wrong. The starting point was 5 games, Ibrahomivic was given 2 games credit for admitting what he did was wrong. As it says the three games were insufficient if FOUND guilty, not admitting you were.

 

The Bournemouth statement does say that Mings apologised to Ibrahimovic twice after the incident.

 

The cynic in me says they would say that. Any decent human being would make a point of checking the victim was okay if you'd accidently stamped on their head! Didn't see Mings do any of that.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Only Mings knows whether he did it deliberately. In a court of law it would have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt, in an FA hearing it's the balance of probability. If you look across social media , radio & TV most ex pros & ex referees felt it was deliberate. The problem is if you start judging incidents on the pitch with beyond reasonable doubt, lots of serious incidents will go unpunished. There has to be an element of "we think he meant it"

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Highfield Saint]

"We fully support our player. Tyrone has an excellent disciplinary record and has not been sent off in 75 matches as a professional. During that time he has only received 13 yellow cards - the last of which came in April 2015."

 

Talk about spin - that's once every six games and he only played twice last year I think!

[trousers]

Any decent human being would make a point of checking the victim was okay if you'd accidently stamped on their head!

 

# Devil's advocate klaxon #

 

Someone who did it on purpose might do that too, in order to try and make out that it was an accident, ergo, checking the 'victim' is OK straight away afterwards could mean it was either an accident or deliberate, i.e. inconclusive regardless.

[Shroppie]

Barcelona were done massive favour yesterday by UEFA or whoever gave the ref that brown paper bag..

Certainly agree with that. Penalty for a blatant dive, PSG denied one, 5 mins added on for nothing.

 

I'm not joining in the adulation today. Barcelona won that simply by cheating. That deserves no respect.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[Shroppie]

I expect this to get moved as the only tenuous link to Saints is that Tyrone Mings will miss the game against us in April. But as we have another weekend off no harm in sticking an interlude into the normal run of things to discuss.

 

Am I alone in thinking that a bit of favouritism has crept into the punishments handed out by the FA to Ibrahimovic and Mings after the rough and tumble of the Man U v Cherries game on Saturday. If anything I think the match bans served up are back to front.

You could debate until the cows come home whether Mings trod on the head Ibrahimovic on purpose. Having just been in a tussle resulting in a heap of bodies on the floor, the decision to tread on his head is not going to be a premeditated act, more of an opportunity presenting itself: if it was Mings intent.

On the flip side the Elbow in the face Mings from Ibrahimovic has to be a worse offence as it has to have been premeditated, Ibrahimovic knew who was at his shoulder and the act of elbowing Mings was, as most people could see, a deliberate action to get him back having had a while to wait for he opportunity.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39210644

I agree that this stinks. At best, it's a flawed and wrong decision and at worst, it increases my cynicism about the priorities for those who run football and now rely dangerously on TV funding streams.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[Pass the Dutchie]

"We fully support our player. Tyrone has an excellent disciplinary record and has not been sent off in 75 matches as a professional. During that time he has only received 13 yellow cards - the last of which came in April 2015."

 

Talk about spin - that's once every six games and he only played twice last year I think!

 

One yellow per six games isn't bad. Watford's Holebas already picked up twelve cards this season alone.

[East Kent Saint]

Re Barca , totally agree the end of the match was fixed ! dodgy pen , extra time etc but no mention of this in reports just fantastic comeback etc even worse than ManU bias or Liverpool Bias in the 80's .

[AK]

You don't know how it works do you. You don't get extra punishment for not pleading guilty, you get credit for pleading guilty, ie admitting what you did was wrong. The starting point was 5 games, Ibrahomivic was given 2 games credit for admitting what he did was wrong. As it says the three games were insufficient if FOUND guilty, not admitting you were.

 

 

 

.

 

Spot on as usual Pal-You carry on belligerently making the wrong assumptions.

 

the FA suggested Mings could face an increased ban for his offence.

An FA statement said: "The FA has submitted a claim that the standard punishment that would otherwise apply for the misconduct committed by the Bournemouth defender is 'clearly insufficient'."

 

 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39182905

 

This is obviously completely contradictory to your statement that they both would have received the same punishment if they had entered the same plea.

Edited 9 March, 2017 by AK
Link added

[simo]

If I was mings I'd be seeking legal advice!

[Charlie Wayman]

Football at the highest level is rotten to the core, of course the whole PL thing is fixed and this is no cynical tongue-in-cheek trolling remark. Our perfectly legitimate 7th minute goal at Wembley was disallowed through an "erroneous" refereeing decision and now Mings gets a 5 game ban whilst Ibrahimovic escapes with three and Barcelona need to score 6 goals to win and do so! Who's getting the bungs?

[benjii]

Whilst Suarez dived for the pen, Barcelona's pressing and possession was absolutely fantastic. No point being churlish about that. Their back 4 are dodgy but that's another thing. If the ref was bribed he could have awarded them a penalty earlier but he actually booked Suarez for diving earlier. As for the Di Maria penalty claim, it may well have been, but it was a tough call at full speed, I think.

 

The 5 mins added time was absolutely justified with the number of goals and subs during the second half.

 

So, yes, whilst they probably should have been knocked out because that penner was a poor decision they still deserve adulation for an incredible attacking display. Suarez is a **** - he was before and he still is. Doesn't mean the team is a "cheat".

[Saint-Fred]

Surely the only debate is whether it was deliberate or not?

Once it was decided it was deliberate he is lucky not have been banned for six months.

[spyinthesky]

Re the Barcelona game

 

Only saw snippets on BBC

However one thing that caught my eye was the second penalty (I think) where there were several players from either side well within the penalty area when the pen was taken.

 

Ref should have insisted than the penalty was retaken.

 

Probably would not have affected the result but who knows?

[Saint-Fred]

Football at the highest level is rotten to the core, of course the whole PL thing is fixed and this is no cynical tongue-in-cheek trolling remark. Our perfectly legitimate 7th minute goal at Wembley was disallowed through an "erroneous" refereeing decision and now Mings gets a 5 game ban whilst Ibrahimovic escapes with three and Barcelona need to score 6 goals to win and do so! Who's getting the bungs?

 

If you consider how any business works, it's employees must protect the brand and ensure that it continues to grow.

You'd have to think that referees were included in multiple briefs etc about their importance to growing that brand. They would also be briefed that certain teams are more important to that brand than others. Even if it is not said outright, I am sure that the inference to referees would always be that it is better for the league if the big clubs win.

[saintquin]

The way I saw it Mings had a look before jumping over Rooney and Ibrahimovic so he knew where Ibrahimovics' head was when looked away.

Ibrahimovic is a cheat with his diving at the slightest touch but, there are many players like that!

[Saint-Fred]

The way I saw it Mings had a look before jumping over Rooney and Ibrahimovic so he knew where Ibrahimovics' head was when looked away.

Ibrahimovic is a cheat with his diving at the slightest touch but, there are many players like that!

 

Yes and if he hadn't thrown himself to the floor he wouldn't have been there for Mings to tread on!

It's funny that Surman got yellow for a small push (quite rightly) yet earlier Ibra got away with throwing a Bournemouth player to the floor!

[Shroppie]

Re the Barcelona game

 

Only saw snippets on BBC

However one thing that caught my eye was the second penalty (I think) where there were several players from either side well within the penalty area when the pen was taken.

 

Ref should have insisted than the penalty was retaken.

 

Probably would not have affected the result but who knows?

If he'd missed, it would have been retaken.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[simo]

Yes and if he hadn't thrown himself to the floor he wouldn't have been there for Mings to tread on!

It's funny that Surman got yellow for a small push (quite rightly) yet earlier Ibra got away with throwing a Bournemouth player to the floor!

 

That was also Mings that he threw to the floor , his yellow for dissent should have been his second and then he wouldn't have even been on the pitch to be stamped on !

[The9]

The way I saw it Mings had a look before jumping over Rooney and Ibrahimovic so he knew where Ibrahimovics' head was when looked away.

Ibrahimovic is a cheat with his diving at the slightest touch but, there are many players like that!

 

Looked where he was, and then everyone moved before he put his foot down, exactly where he'd have normally put his foot down.

[CityRanger]

That was also Mings that he threw to the floor , his yellow for dissent should have been his second and then he wouldn't have even been on the pitch to be stamped on !

 

Absolutely. The ref bottles it when Ibra threw Mings to the floor. If he'd booked him then the whole ugly episode might have been nipped in bud.

The OP has made an excellent point and one that LeTissier has been making on Twitter lately re big club bias.

[Whitey Grandad]

Looked where he was, and then everyone moved before he put his foot down, exactly where he'd have normally put his foot down.

 

That's how it looked to me.

 

Mings might have been deliberate, Ibrahimovic definitely was.

[BARCELONASAINT]

lol, I do laugh at hypocrisy of some of our fans.....had that been Bournemouth against Saints and Mings had stamped on Gabbys head we would all be calling for blood and a lifetime ban for a player deliberately stamping on another players head....and yes i watched the game and i have no doubt at all Mings knew exactly what he was doing. Zlatan was just as bad and he knew as soon as he elbowed Mings that he was likely to get sent off.

Both deserve the bans and i have no problems with Mings being a longer ban for what he did.

 

And please don't get me started on Barca, they did what they had to do and one could easily argue PSG could easily of have had a couple of players sent off. Again had that been Saints achieving that monumental come back not one of you would be complaining and you all would be celebrating madly and accusing opposition fans of sour grapes.

 

I'm glad i can enjoy both my teams!...

 

And before any of you ask how i can support two teams....its purely down to the fact i'm a Southampton lad that grew up with a Spanish father who supported Real Madrid...so obviously i supported the team he hated....lol

[whelk]

I don't think the FA favour the big teams but refs mostly do. Not in any deliberate way but will inevitably make more passive decisions. Would love to know what Friend was saying to Zlatan for 30 seconds or so. Subconsciously or not he was probably thinking Mourinho will be off on conspiracy rant if I get this wrong and that's the news for the next few days so easier not to send him off.

Not that had to have different thought process for Surman and was right decision when on a yellow but he knows that will never be a talking point in same way.

Fergie played that same game and does get them the advantage.

[Verbal Kint]

I don't think the FA favour the big teams but refs mostly do. Not in any deliberate way but will inevitably make more passive decisions. Would love to know what Friend was saying to Zlatan for 30 seconds or so. Subconsciously or not he was probably thinking Mourinho will be off on conspiracy rant if I get this wrong and that's the news for the next few days so easier not to send him off.

Not that had to have different thought process for Surman and was right decision when on a yellow but he knows that will never be a talking point in same way.

Fergie played that same game and does get them the advantage.

 

Can you imagine the reaction if United had had a goal disallowed like ours was in the final and had lost the game 3-2? Mourinho would have used the word 'cheated' about 10 times in his interview

[igsey]

Still don't understand the difference in bans for Mings and Ibrahimovic. Both were dangerous, both lead to a hard blow on the head (whether intentional or not is irrelevant, it's dangerous play) - I think we just see elbows to the head a lot more often than boots to the head. Personally I don't think Mings standing on Ibrahimovic's head was deliberate, but it doesn't change the fact that it happened and is worthy of a ban.

 

Of course, if we had video refereeing, we wouldn't be having this conversation - one or t'other of them would have been sent off before the Ibrahimovic elbow occurred (I think Ibrahimovic was on a yellow when he judo-threw Mings to the ground? If not then Mings would have been off for the stamp).