Let's All Laugh At... Let's All Laugh At West Ham

[Wellspurs]

Rat? I knew it was only a matter of time before he left!

 

[nightgoat]

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...lenge-over-andy-carroll-red-card-9109068.html

West Ham manager Sam Allardyce meanwhile, said he was “bitterly disappointed” by the decision. “I’m going to have to talk to my chairmen before I say anything – I’m that angry,” he added.

The Upton Park club are so incensed by the rejection of their appeal against Carroll’s red card that they are considering appointing a top QC, crossbench peer Lord Pannick, to explore the possibility of legally challenging the decision.

That QC's a made up name, right?

 

[$hoguN]

I don't know why Fat Sam is even complaining. Yes it may not have been as bad as that **** Flores made it out to be but Carroll clearly did swing his arm at him so got what he deserved.

Moral of the story for Andy Carroll is if you act like a ****, you can't complain when you get f**ked.

 

[absolute bobbins]

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...lenge-over-andy-carroll-red-card-9109068.html



That QC's a made up name, right?

I think we can see why Gold and Sullivan instructed him

Blackstone Chambers

He has also appeared in court for a wide range of other clients, from Red Hot Television to the Lord Chancellor, from Diana Princess of Wales to Lord Rees-Mogg.

 

[JerryGarcia]

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...lenge-over-andy-carroll-red-card-9109068.html



That QC's a made up name, right?

Haha it's a real person

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Pannick,_Baron_Pannick

 

[michaelden]

Did Carroll/Flores start the situation by committing a foul. Answer. Flores.
Did Carroll/Flores pretend to be injured. Answer. Flores.
Did Carroll's swing his arm in order to make contact with Flores. Answer. Possibly but not definitely.
Did Flores swing his arm in order to make contact with Carroll. Answer Almost definitely.(see page 73) Why Because Flores arm moved from the front of his body backwards as if to strike.

I have asked the FA under what criteria would they act against Flores and as of yet they have not replied.
If two people commit the same act it is wrong only to punish one.

UTJ can we put the video on the news page with an appropriate title as I don't think everyone is aware that Flores struck out at Carroll.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26039222

David Gold: "We are hugely disappointed at the outcome of the process.

"The last thing I want to do is going to some kind of legal issue because I think it is a footballing issue.

"But we are fighting for our lives. If we were mid-table we would probably get on with it but we are fighting for our lives to retain our Premier League status and we owe it to our fans, we owe it to ourselves.

"We are upset, we feel we have been badly treated.

"Most judgements are not made by three people, they are made by 12 - that's why they are called juries.

"I believe if you had gone to the FA Council and asked the 100 members 75% would have said it was not a sending off, but if you just take three people it may not be representative."

I'll have a jury of eggs please...

Unless you have seen Webb's match report then you don't know he saw it.

From many angles it appears his view was blocked and he might have started looking the other way.

He 100% consulted the linesman before reaching for the card as I saw it with my own eyes at the match.

I honestly believe Carroll wouldn't even have been booked had Flores not acted like he'd been shot.

I can understand why at the time it was done but after seeing the replay it should have been rescinded.

Any other ref in the league and it would have been in my opinion, this is all about Webb and The World Cup

I think we should just take it now BUT someone should challenge the corrupt old coffin dodgers, I would just rather it wasn't us.

 

[hans]

west ham are pathetic

 

[JerryGarcia]

When Carroll gets up there's really no need for him to even raise his arm so I can't see it getting overturned. That angle does show what a twat Chico is though, what an embarrassment.

Has a team ever tried to take legal action over a red card before or are West Ham going to be the first? I assume they signed some kind of agreement with the FA that they would follow the rules though so they're blowing more hot air than bubbles.

 

[absolute bobbins]

When Carroll gets up there's really no need for him to even raise his arm so I can't see it getting overturned. That angle does show what a twat Chico is though, what an embarrassment.

Has a team ever tried to take legal action over a red card before or are West Ham going to be the first? I assume they signed some kind of agreement with the FA that they would follow the rules though so they're blowing more hot air than bubbles.

I think they'll be the first, nobody else has tried to destroy football.

If it does go to court, they'll need a better defence than they had against Forest

 

[nailsy]

So if West Ham are considering legal action what does this mean for his suspension? He's currently due to miss the games against Villa, Norwich and Southampton starting tomorrow. Does this mean that he can keep playing until the case has been heard? If he can't play I'm not sure what the point of the legal action is. If he can play then they are probably just trying to play the system and make sure he misses games that they would be almost certain to lose.

 

[chrissivad]

The FA telling it?

Andy Carroll: FA to reconsider West Ham striker's red card
The Football Association will reconsider its decision to uphold a three-match ban for West Ham striker Andy Carroll on Friday.
The club had threatened legal action against the FA after their initial attempt to overturn the ban was rejected by an appeals panel.
But the Premier League strugglers say they will now abide by any decision made at the arbitration hearing.

In a statement, West Ham said they had "no intention of taking the issue to the courts, but simply seek a fair determination of [our] rights under the FA's rules".
The Hammers, who lie 18th in the table, also suggested the FA-appointed panel "did not apply the correct test" under its rules when making the original decision.
The move to reconsider the upholding of the initial suspension with a further hearing is a highly unusual one, and is the last stage a dispute can reach under FA rules.
It is thought to be the first time in Premier League history that a rejected red-card appeal has then been referred to an independent arbitrator.
West Ham manager Sam Allardyce said he hoped that "common sense" would prevail.
"My reaction to Andy's red card was one of injustice. Unfortunately the panel has not seen it as they should have. If there's a decision today hopefully it's a positive one."
Carroll, 25, was dismissed after clashing with Swans defender Chico Flores at Upton Park.

According to the FA, West Ham failed to prove that referee Howard Webb had made "an obvious error" in dismissing the forward, whose arm hit Flores on the top of his head as he tried to untangle himself following an aerial challenge.
Flores went to ground clutching his face but West Ham felt he had overacted. Replays also suggested that the contact was unintentional.
Speaking before West Ham had withdrawn their threat to take legal action, Aston Villa manager Paul Lambert expressed his concerns about the precedent which may be set in the event of the appeal being successful.
"If it is overruled, then you create a monster of everybody wanting to do the same," said Lambert.
When asked whether he would go down a similar route were his side to be in a similar situation, the Scot replied: "It's hard to say. You can understand West Ham trying.
"You'd have to judge the incident on its merit. Everybody is going to be different, whether they think something is dangerous or not."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26081791


I hope they add more games onto his suspension

 

[beats1]

The FA telling it?

Andy Carroll: FA to reconsider West Ham striker's red card
The Football Association will reconsider its decision to uphold a three-match ban for West Ham striker Andy Carroll on Friday.
The club had threatened legal action against the FA after their initial attempt to overturn the ban was rejected by an appeals panel.
But the Premier League strugglers say they will now abide by any decision made at the arbitration hearing.

In a statement, West Ham said they had "no intention of taking the issue to the courts, but simply seek a fair determination of [our] rights under the FA's rules".
The Hammers, who lie 18th in the table, also suggested the FA-appointed panel "did not apply the correct test" under its rules when making the original decision.
The move to reconsider the upholding of the initial suspension with a further hearing is a highly unusual one, and is the last stage a dispute can reach under FA rules.
It is thought to be the first time in Premier League history that a rejected red-card appeal has then been referred to an independent arbitrator.
West Ham manager Sam Allardyce said he hoped that "common sense" would prevail.
"My reaction to Andy's red card was one of injustice. Unfortunately the panel has not seen it as they should have. If there's a decision today hopefully it's a positive one."
Carroll, 25, was dismissed after clashing with Swans defender Chico Flores at Upton Park.

According to the FA, West Ham failed to prove that referee Howard Webb had made "an obvious error" in dismissing the forward, whose arm hit Flores on the top of his head as he tried to untangle himself following an aerial challenge.
Flores went to ground clutching his face but West Ham felt he had overacted. Replays also suggested that the contact was unintentional.
Speaking before West Ham had withdrawn their threat to take legal action, Aston Villa manager Paul Lambert expressed his concerns about the precedent which may be set in the event of the appeal being successful.
"If it is overruled, then you create a monster of everybody wanting to do the same," said Lambert.
When asked whether he would go down a similar route were his side to be in a similar situation, the Scot replied: "It's hard to say. You can understand West Ham trying.
"You'd have to judge the incident on its merit. Everybody is going to be different, whether they think something is dangerous or not."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26081791


I hope they add more games onto his suspension

What a bunch of pussies, the fact they are listening to their threats means they have opened a whole can of worms

West Ham may of just screwed up football even more. Classless shits

 

[RButch]

West Ham rivalry aside, every time I watch the gif/ the incident I am 100% sure he purposely swings his arm to catch Flores. Carroll's reactions says it all (or lack of reaction for hitting someone), along with that he swung his arm with enough force that it hyperextended past the usual position of his arm (a 90 degree angle to his body.)

 

[wooderz]

Looking at the gif above, I can't see it being intentional, he doesn't once look to see where Chico is and he is just swinging round after the tangle, I've done that, to me, no card.

 

[TaoistMonkey]

I love the Zero emotion from the crowd. They barely move.

 

[Mouse!]

Can we sue the FA or that **** of a linesman we had against City? Those decisions could have cost us valuable points in the race for CL, and loss of income.

I don't see how it's any different to what Wet Spam are doing?

If they want to be silly, let's all be silly.

 

[JerryGarcia]

Can we sue the FA or that **** of a linesman we had against City? Those decisions could have cost us valuable points in the race for CL, and loss of income.

I don't see how it's any different to what Wet Spam are doing?

If they want to be silly, let's all be silly.

We'd have more of a case than them as our card was at least over turned and proved to be a mistake.

 

[nailsy]

I can't tell if it's intentional, but would Carroll have been aware that Chico was bending down like that and running towards him when he swung round? Also if you look at Chicos arm it also swings out to the side and hits Carrol in the stomach.

 

[JerryGarcia]

It's being reported that they've lost their second appeal

 

[Kendall]

Personally I don't think that's a red in a million years.