England FA charges Tottenham, Brighton for failure to control Managers’ brawl

[mawspurs]

The England Football Association has charged Tottenham Hotspur and Brighton and Hove Albion after a touchline confrontation during last Saturday’s English Premier League game.

The altercation resulted in Spurs’ caretaker manager, Christian Stellini and Brighton’s Roberto De Zerbi, being sent off in the 58th minute. The FA alleges that both clubs failed to control the behaviour and conduct of those in their technical area during the incident.

Source: The Will

 

[kneesalltrembly]

We find it very hard to control a football!
Is that a valid defence?

 

[quackers]

appeal and Stellini gets an additional 2 match ban we get maseball for 5 matches then...

 

[Phantom]

I didn't see it, who or what actually started it all? I have only seen some pics which shows stellini not getting involved

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

appeal and Stellini gets an additional 2 match ban we get maseball for 5 matches then...

Stellini did not get even a 1-match ban, so I'm not sure what you are on about...

 

[quackers]

Stellini did not get even a 1-match ban, so I'm not sure what you are on about...

he got a straight red - surely thats a 3 match touchline ban?

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

he got a straight red - surely thats a 3 match touchline ban?

No, that's not how it works for managers.

 

[Johnny J]

I didn't see it, who or what actually started it all? I have only seen some pics which shows stellini not getting involved

De Zerbi was talking shit right from the start of the game. He and his coaching team were provoking our side, and then we reacted.

I'll happily admit when we're at fault but this is mainly on De Zerbi being a prick.

 

[Japhet]

Stellini didn't get involved. He got sent off. If he had have got involved, he'd have been sent off. Ridiculous decision in a match full of ridiculous decisions.

 

[Freddie]

No, that's not how it works for managers.

Or players

 

[Geez]

Something actually useful in the Sun!
What happens if a manager gets a red or yellow card?
Includes:-

Managers can be given a straight red card for a serious incident classed as a "stage two offence" which will result in the same punishment.

Managers are also responsible for their backroom staff, so if they are acting inappropriately it will be the manager who receives the card.

A manager who is sent off will be forced to serve a one-match touchline ban.

As with players, this ban can be longer if violent conduct is involved.

 

[newbie]

Stellini didn't get involved. He got sent off. If he had have got involved, he'd have been sent off. Ridiculous decision in a match full of ridiculous decisions.

It was crazy the one guy who kept his cool and not involved got sent off

 

[Japhet]

It was crazy the one guy who kept his cool and not involved got sent off

The officiating for the whole game was laughable.

 

[newbie]

The officiating for the whole game was laughable.

Yup and somehow even with our manger sent off when he was not involved, none of us would argue we were not lucky

 

[rabbikeane]

That's why the boss get the most money, it comes with responsibility.

 

[yiddopaul]

It was crazy the one guy who kept his cool and not involved got sent off

I think that's the problem. Stellini looked like he didn't give a shit. There was all the chaos going on around him and he did nothing to calm his staff/players down. Just looked gormless

 

[thecook]

They really should have just sent Levy off as he's the one in charge of the dugout really!

 

[Neon_Knight_]

Yup and somehow even with our manger sent off when he was not involved, none of us would argue we were not lucky

I would definitely argue that we were not lucky. Perhaps in terms of getting 3 points from a poor performance, but not in terms of the VAR decisions. My reasoning:

1. The first disallowed goal was a clear handball (two angles clearly showed the ball contacting his bicep, plus the "sleeve line" rule was replaced with an "armpit line" rule).
2. The second disallowed goal was a clear handball (Lloris was diving for a rising shot, then a Brighton player's arms deflected the ball down and under his dive).
3. The first penalty appeal was the result of a corner incorrectly awarded to Brighton (should have been a goal-kick and therefore the foul would never have happened).
4. The second penalty appeal was for a shirt-pull on Dunk. Lenglet was goal-side of Dunk, then Dunk fouled him to get goal-side (two handed push, while charging into him), then Lenglet pulled his shirt. A VAR review would show that Dunk committed the first infringements, so it should have been a freekick to us.
5. Dunk's "stamp" on Romero was intentional violent conduct, so should always be a straight red.

Had any of decisions 1-4 gone Brighton's way, it would have been unfair. That decision 5 went Brighton's way was unfair.

If you disagree with any of that, you need to re-watch the game and/or better familiarise yourself with the current rules.

 

[newbie]

I would definitely argue that we were not lucky. Perhaps in terms of getting 3 points from a poor performance, but not in terms of the VAR decisions. My reasoning:

1. The first disallowed goal was a clear handball (two angles clearly showed the ball contacting his bicep, plus the "sleeve line" rule was replaced with an "armpit line" rule).
2. The second disallowed goal was a clear handball (Lloris was diving for a rising shot, then a Brighton player's arms deflected the ball down and under his dive).
3. The first penalty appeal was the result of a corner incorrectly awarded to Brighton (should have been a goal-kick and therefore the foul would never have happened).
4. The second penalty appeal was for a shirt-pull on Dunk. Lenglet was goal-side of Dunk, then Dunk fouled him to get goal-side (two handed push, while charging into him), then Lenglet pulled his shirt. A VAR review would show that Dunk committed the first infringements, so it should have been a freekick to us.
5. Dunk's "stamp" on Romero was intentional violent conduct, so should always be a straight red.

Had any of decisions 1-4 gone Brighton's way, it would have been unfair. That decision 5 went Brighton's way was unfair.

If you disagree with any of that, you need to re-watch the game and/or better familiarise yourself with the current rules.

Tbh you have gone further than any of the pundits so fair play