No. That’s not true

Read the definition and apply it properly

There’s two ways it could be a red:

1. He deliberately strikes him in the face, or
2. It’s considered excessive force, (I.e risks injuring an opponent)

I think it’s sufficiently clear that he’s trying to block the run of their player who is making a move to receive the ball from a throw in (in actual fact, the ball is thrown further), that it can’t be viewed as being a deliberate strike to the face.

In which case, it can only be excessive force. I don’t think that constitutes excessive force. As Huckerby said on Twitter, iwan Roberts would have spent his entire career suspended (paraphrasing)

Posted By: SimonOTBC on December 10th 2024 at 18:10:42

Message Thread

Violent conduct offence (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Dec 10, 17:42:58
- he barely touched him - the bloke dived (NCFC) - paulg, Dec 10, 18:16:04
- Unbelievable. (NCFC) - ShamedSeamus, Dec 10, 18:06:52
- Let's wait for SCC to VAR it before rushing to judgement yeah! (NCFC) - JD3, Dec 10, 17:50:13
  - 100% red card (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 10, 17:57:40
    - I take it you've not played the game at a decent level? (n/m) (NCFC) - Linky, Dec 10, 19:21:07
      - Yes we definitely need ex pros to apply the laws (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 10, 19:52:55
    - The ref also appears to have a clear sight of it but decides to do nothing! (n/m) (NCFC) - JD3, Dec 10, 18:07:59
      - He’s looking the other way (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 10, 18:10:03
    - 👀 (NCFC) - JD3, Dec 10, 18:04:17
      - Block him in the face (n/m) (NCFC) - Ken Dodds Dads Dog, Dec 10, 18:09:50
    - Sent the video to a neutral for their observation (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 10, 18:02:01
      - your Mum doesn't count as a neutral (n/m) (NCFC) - ghostof barry butler, Dec 10, 18:19:55
        
        Hohoho (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 10, 18:24:57
    - Applying the rules though, why are you saying it’s a red? (n/m) (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Dec 10, 18:00:12
      - Because it’s violent conduct (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 10, 18:05:12
        
        Hahahaha. (NCFC) - ShamedSeamus, Dec 10, 18:11:40
        
        Forget it, he'll back the officials even if they're wrong. (n/m) (NCFC) - Linky, Dec 10, 19:22:24
        
        I’ve disagreed with plenty of officials (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 10, 19:53:59
        
        Well it’s an off the ball incident (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 10, 18:15:21
        
        No. That’s not true (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Dec 10, 18:10:42
        
        He looks to check where the player is then he swings his arm in his face..... (NCFC) - Mark Barham, Dec 10, 18:19:15
        
        Who asked you? (n/m) (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Dec 10, 18:20:55
        
        Who asked you??? (n/m) (NCFC) - Mark Barham, Dec 10, 18:21:51
- I wonder if the previous ban is having an effect here (NCFC) - APB, Dec 10, 17:49:21
- It isn’t. He just puts his arm out. Don’t think he hits him in the face either (NCFC) - Jim, Dec 10, 17:46:00
- Can’t think of any other examples of players being punished after a game … (NCFC) - loz, Dec 10, 17:44:40
  - It isn’t inconclusive (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 10, 17:59:26
- I mean, it looks deliberate to me... (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 10, 17:44:13
  - I don’t think he deliberately strikes his head or face (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Dec 10, 17:46:42
  - Though it is interesting that his right arm also goes, which suggests just bracing (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 10, 17:46:17
    - He’s shielding / blocking (n/m) (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Dec 10, 17:47:15
      - Yep it is isn't it (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 10, 17:49:54
      - Yep, deliberately blocking not deliberately trying to whack him (n/m) (NCFC) - jamesward, Dec 10, 17:47:57

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.