FFS. 6 game ban would be stupid. I think 4 should be fine considering the players' history. He's never really got involved like this.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Mousa Dembele
- Thread starter SDOGG11
- Start date
Don't think Dembele actually touched him. If you slow it down it looks as if he just stopped at the last second. The fact that Costa's reaction was to hold the other side of his face is more evidence that there was no contact. However, can he still be banned for intent. Not sure why Fabregas is also not on a charge as there are clear indications that he provoked the after match brawl.
King of Norway
Gudni Bergsson
Fabregas also kicked out at one of our players early in the match. I haven't heard any mention of that after the game. He didn't make contact, but he gave it his best shot.
tynesidespur
Terry Yorath
It was a bizarre incident in which he appeared to have lost all control and yet at the same time he kept control enough to graze his eye rather than actually gouge it because he knew it was wrong, very wrong.
Not sure what Costa was doing but clearly most of the Chelsea team had been at Dembele in that first half. I’ve never seen him react before so I can only imagine they wound him up verbally/physically and it resulted in that.
He’s probably best to request a personal hearing and put his point across – while of course accepting the charge. I would hope good behaviour (compared to say, Suarez) would stand him in good stead. It usually does in a court of law?
The only thing I can say is defensible is that it was Costa, maybe the only player in the entire league who would incite you to do something animal like that. Not really an excuse though – he’d have been better off just giving him a full swing with a left hook.
Not sure what Costa was doing but clearly most of the Chelsea team had been at Dembele in that first half. I’ve never seen him react before so I can only imagine they wound him up verbally/physically and it resulted in that.
He’s probably best to request a personal hearing and put his point across – while of course accepting the charge. I would hope good behaviour (compared to say, Suarez) would stand him in good stead. It usually does in a court of law?
The only thing I can say is defensible is that it was Costa, maybe the only player in the entire league who would incite you to do something animal like that. Not really an excuse though – he’d have been better off just giving him a full swing with a left hook.
paxtonwolf
Tony Marchi
KON I fear you may need to cancel that Sky subscription my friend, they have intimated 3 is clearly insufficient, so I doubt they would just make it 4. Can see 6 being the minimum tbh
paxtonwolf
Tony Marchi
No mention of Fabregas is no surprise, despite his actions, allegedly, sparking the scenes after the whistle
glasgowspur
Luka Modric
The club should say the FA, ok 3 game ban and we move on. Anymore and we will see you in court.
Why is a gouge worse than a flying forearm, head but or punch? All of which have occurred in the past with no more than a standard three match ban. You can't use a generic term like violent conduct without parameters and then say ah you've exceeded violent conduct parameters.
It should be made plain by the club that any hint of a ban exceeding the norm and there will be ramifications.
Every weekend I would be sending videos to the FA on any incident and asking for a written public explanation of why that action was taken. If there is any discrepancies I would jump on them.
You can't make rules and punishments up as you go along.
Why is a gouge worse than a flying forearm, head but or punch? All of which have occurred in the past with no more than a standard three match ban. You can't use a generic term like violent conduct without parameters and then say ah you've exceeded violent conduct parameters.
It should be made plain by the club that any hint of a ban exceeding the norm and there will be ramifications.
Every weekend I would be sending videos to the FA on any incident and asking for a written public explanation of why that action was taken. If there is any discrepancies I would jump on them.
You can't make rules and punishments up as you go along.
Rorschach
Sonny Walters
I think a gouge is worse than a punch for example and should be treated differently, however it is clear that he didn't really gouge his eye or Costa would have reacted completely differently (maybe even a genuine reaction for a change). So if they ban him it is for intent to gouge rather than an actually gouge, and I think this is shakey ground for the FA. If you can get excessive bans for intent then Costa himself has dozens of incidents which he somehow escaped punishment but the intent was there. Even in this match Fabregas intended to kick a Spurs defender and missed and Costa attempted to bite Vorm.
If the ban is excessive I think Levy might be on the phone to his lawyers and that brickstorm is not something the FA want to be involved in.
If the ban is excessive I think Levy might be on the phone to his lawyers and that brickstorm is not something the FA want to be involved in.
Lemonade Money
Les Medley
I would argue it's Costa's reaction that makes it look like a gouge, and he doesn't even hold the same part of his face! Without that reaction, it's just Dembele getting in his face, no different to a pansy head butt.
Looks like I might be right then.
Glenda's Legs
Paul Walsh
It sort of looks like it starts out as an attempt at the eye area but then Mousa's hand veers off. Definitely more scratch than gouge. Still not acceptable behaviour but talks of extended bans beyond 3 games seems excessive.
Leaving to one side the rights or wrongs of Dembele's actions, it does seem another case of selective trial by tv
Leaving to one side the rights or wrongs of Dembele's actions, it does seem another case of selective trial by tv
King of Norway
Gudni Bergsson
The pictures show quite clearly that it isn't an eye gouge, but rather a scratch, so I think Dembele will have a pretty good case in a hearing. They can't ban someone for something that the evidences show he didn't do. A three match ban for raising his hands to a player's face be sufficient.
There surely has to be some collective wrongdoing/cheating/economical mess to invoke points deduction? The Nibbler alone would have sent Liverpool straight down to league 2.
But I agree that it would have been an extremely convenient way to summon St. Totteringsday again.
This. There's more than enough precedent that a first violent offence with no harm done whatsoever is a 3 matches (or fewer) ban.
Most importantly, we can afford better lawyers than the FA so fudge them.
Modric THFC
Jimmy McCormick
Looks like his next game for us will be in the Champion's League groups.
He could probably do with a rest after the Euros.
Mason and Bentaleb get an opportunity to step up.
He could probably do with a rest after the Euros.
Mason and Bentaleb get an opportunity to step up.
Craig_J
Mido
The collective wrongdoing would be the 9 players booked. I know we've already been charged with that buit has the punishment been handed out yet?
parklane1
Tony Galvin
While I agree that 10 games for that would be ridiculous I wish some Spurs fans would take off the blue tinted glasses, he may not have meant to take his eye out but it could have happened and just because he is a Spurs player should make no difference to what is a bad offense.