| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision 11:33 - Sep 23 with 15995 views | SaxonDale |
according to the club twitter feed. |  | | |  |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 11:35 - Sep 23 with 9309 views | Shakersforever |
Saw it on SSN and thought it was a ridiculous decision. |  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 11:53 - Sep 23 with 9273 views | Yorkshire_Dale |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 11:35 - Sep 23 by Shakersforever |
Saw it on SSN and thought it was a ridiculous decision. |
What,the tackle or the decision to appeal?
We need to move to Wales for a few days. | | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 11:57 - Sep 23 with 9264 views | debbiesfella |
Referee should be reprimanded for an appalling decision. |  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 12:00 - Sep 23 with 9257 views | lurker |
The appeal is a waste of time and money.
I have every sympathy for Donnelly and for the Dale coaching staff after what was undoubtedly a poor decision. However, in these situations without a clear lack of a tackle, the FA will always back their referee. |  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 12:11 - Sep 23 with 9234 views | Shakersforever |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 11:53 - Sep 23 by Yorkshire_Dale |
What,the tackle or the decision to appeal?
We need to move to Wales for a few days. |
The tackle. It wasn't a red card offence, far from it. | | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 12:33 - Sep 23 with 9163 views | TTNYear |
I confidently predict that the red card to be upheld and Donnelly banned for three games. |  |
| Anti-cliquism is the last refuge of the messageboard scoundrel - Copyright Dorset Dale productions |
| |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 13:19 - Sep 23 with 9041 views | Daley_Lama |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 12:33 - Sep 23 by TTNYear |
I confidently predict that the red card to be upheld and Donnelly banned for three games. |
I confidently agree, for the law is an ass in this area and contridicts normal legal process.
GD is guilty because the ref said so at the time.
This decision is right unless undebatable, irrefutable, unchallengable evidence is given to show otherwise.
GD was on the pitch wearing a Rochdale shirt. Guilty as charged.
TV evidence is no use, as seen when David Perkins did not touch the opposition player.
Even when the opposition manager isn't sure what happened (He elbowed him, I saw it. Oh, he punched him, I saw that too. Actually he kicked him, the player told me - Keith Alexander (r.i.p.) on the Gareth Griffith appeal) it never helps.
That's not good enough to overturn a red where we are concerned.
Have we ever won one? |  |
| |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 13:36 - Sep 23 with 8979 views | macro |
I agree, they'll say Intent was there |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 14:22 - Sep 23 with 8883 views | Yorkshire_Dale |
The real idiot in all this is Tom Aldred! | | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 14:25 - Sep 23 with 8858 views | Sandyman |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 14:22 - Sep 23 by Yorkshire_Dale |
The real idiot in all this is Tom Aldred! |
And I'm sure he will be reminded when Accy visit Spotland. The ref was an idiot as well. [Post edited 23 Sep 2013 14:26]
|  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 14:44 - Sep 23 with 8822 views | maybee |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 14:22 - Sep 23 by Yorkshire_Dale |
The real idiot in all this is Tom Aldred! |
Actually, I was more annoyed at the antics of Nicky Hunt. It genuinely looked as though he had a serious injury when he was beating his fists on the ground and screaming in agony.
As soon as Donnelly was red carded, he got up and jogged off the pitch, laughing at the Dale fans who were giving him stick.
Former Premiership player getting a fellow professional sent off. He must be so proud of himself. |  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 14:56 - Sep 23 with 8797 views | KenBoon |
Regardless of what they do with Donnelly, everyone involved in the incident should be looked at and appropriate punishments handed out. I'd expect 3 game bans for the two Accrington players and the referee sent on a refresher course/eye test. Nothing will change until retrospective action is taken against cheats who ruin games, rob the paying public of a fair competition and damage the reputation of the game. I'm all for protecting referees, and the best way of doing that is sending the message out to cheats that making a referee look stupid is getting harder and they will be punished. |  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 17:21 - Sep 23 with 8597 views | trueblue83 |
Is there a punishment for failed appeals? I seem to remember a threat of them extending the suspension if the appeal was rejected? I'm sure there must be a punishment (financial maybe?) otherwise every club would surely appeal every decision that went against them? | |
| "You can compare us at the moment to a bit of soft porn - there is an awful lot of foreplay and not a lot going on in the box" - Sir Keith Hill |
| |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 17:37 - Sep 23 with 8562 views | SimpkinsLeftPeg |
It costs clubs quite a bit of money to appeal, which is obviously not recouped if the appeal is lost.
I believe there is only an extension to the ban if it is deemed "frivolous", which with this and Cav's appeal is not the case (or shouldn't be). [Post edited 23 Sep 2013 17:37]
|  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 21:41 - Sep 23 with 8305 views | Swissdale |
If this appeal isn't successful, the club should seek public confirmation from the FA as to what exactly the grounds are for a successful appeal.
With the video footage, along with the photo of the incident, there is absolutely no way they can stand by the referees decision.
It still sticks in my throat that the Perkins red card wasn't rescinded, but this red was even worse! Another example of the FA short-changing lower league clubs if we get knocked back. [Post edited 23 Sep 2013 21:42]
|  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 22:07 - Sep 23 with 8254 views | 442Dale |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 21:41 - Sep 23 by Swissdale |
If this appeal isn't successful, the club should seek public confirmation from the FA as to what exactly the grounds are for a successful appeal.
With the video footage, along with the photo of the incident, there is absolutely no way they can stand by the referees decision.
It still sticks in my throat that the Perkins red card wasn't rescinded, but this red was even worse! Another example of the FA short-changing lower league clubs if we get knocked back. [Post edited 23 Sep 2013 21:42]
|
If we win this appeal, the Perkins decision looks even worse. |  |
| |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 23:01 - Sep 23 with 8189 views | wmgunit |
Replays still inconclusive for me. Genuinely can see why the referee sent him off. Impossible to tell whether its the right decision without slow-mo. |  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 23:09 - Sep 23 with 8181 views | dancdale |
Strange. At the time I thought it was a reasonable decision- that Donnelly had over-ran the ball and frustrated by his mistake, stupidly lunged studs first into a challenge, connecting with the players leg. After reading this thread I guessed I must have been wrong so had a look at the clip online.
I still really cant understand the strength of opinion against the decision.
Pic 1. The clearest wrongful action was the two footed jump he made into the challenge
Pic 2. He was always going to be, and was a clear second to the ball
Pic 3. Hunt has played the ball by this point and it is now going in the opposite direction- only reason it doesnt continue in that direction (in which case I think there would be fewer arguments) is that it then hits donnellys back leg
Pic 4. Donnellys foot comes down over the top of the ball, stamping down studs first into hunts leg with the momentum from the jump- potentially a leg breaker.
Referee in perfect position sends him off- indicating it was for the stamping action- a perfectly reasonable decision, certainly not the inexcusable one that its being made out to be. Really surprised at the opinion on here and that the club have appealed it, would be amazed if its overturned.
Also concerned at the 'you did nothing wrong' message it gives to Donnelly- the nature of the challenge, jumping two footed, full-frontal, studs first was stupid, reckless and cowardly- motivated by the frustration of his own fk up, and we ended up being lucky to take 3 points. |  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 23:16 - Sep 23 with 8170 views | judd |
Grass. |  |
| |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 23:54 - Sep 23 with 8131 views | NotClingers |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 23:09 - Sep 23 by dancdale |
Strange. At the time I thought it was a reasonable decision- that Donnelly had over-ran the ball and frustrated by his mistake, stupidly lunged studs first into a challenge, connecting with the players leg. After reading this thread I guessed I must have been wrong so had a look at the clip online.
I still really cant understand the strength of opinion against the decision.
Pic 1. The clearest wrongful action was the two footed jump he made into the challenge
Pic 2. He was always going to be, and was a clear second to the ball
Pic 3. Hunt has played the ball by this point and it is now going in the opposite direction- only reason it doesnt continue in that direction (in which case I think there would be fewer arguments) is that it then hits donnellys back leg
Pic 4. Donnellys foot comes down over the top of the ball, stamping down studs first into hunts leg with the momentum from the jump- potentially a leg breaker.
Referee in perfect position sends him off- indicating it was for the stamping action- a perfectly reasonable decision, certainly not the inexcusable one that its being made out to be. Really surprised at the opinion on here and that the club have appealed it, would be amazed if its overturned.
Also concerned at the 'you did nothing wrong' message it gives to Donnelly- the nature of the challenge, jumping two footed, full-frontal, studs first was stupid, reckless and cowardly- motivated by the frustration of his own fk up, and we ended up being lucky to take 3 points. |
I'm not sure that this is conclusive.
Despite the fact that his feet have both left the ground, at the time of impact, one of his feet is planted on the floor so it's hardly a two footed lunge is it?
I think it's also important to determine where the contact was actually made on Hunt (I thought it was his face at the time judging by his reaction). Does Donnelly really make contact with his leg? It looks more like his foot in the pictures you've posted and if that is the case, it wouldn't seem that the lunge was as 'over the top' as it first seems.
It's also questionable whether he was a 'clear' second to the ball. You have to remember that this happened over a course of a few seconds and this has to be taken into account. At the time of the incident, I don't remember thinking he didn't have a right to go for the ball and from the angle that a lot of the Dale fans will have seen it from, you must have eagle eyes to have thought it was the correct decision at the time on the first glance. |  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 23:57 - Sep 23 with 8125 views | judd |
He actually looks like he's squeezing a fart out, imho tbf. | |
| |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 00:07 - Sep 24 with 8116 views | NotClingers |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 23:57 - Sep 23 by judd |
He actually looks like he's squeezing a fart out, imho tbf. |
 | | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 07:07 - Sep 24 with 8047 views | ColDale |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 23:09 - Sep 23 by dancdale |
Strange. At the time I thought it was a reasonable decision- that Donnelly had over-ran the ball and frustrated by his mistake, stupidly lunged studs first into a challenge, connecting with the players leg. After reading this thread I guessed I must have been wrong so had a look at the clip online.
I still really cant understand the strength of opinion against the decision.
Pic 1. The clearest wrongful action was the two footed jump he made into the challenge
Pic 2. He was always going to be, and was a clear second to the ball
Pic 3. Hunt has played the ball by this point and it is now going in the opposite direction- only reason it doesnt continue in that direction (in which case I think there would be fewer arguments) is that it then hits donnellys back leg
Pic 4. Donnellys foot comes down over the top of the ball, stamping down studs first into hunts leg with the momentum from the jump- potentially a leg breaker.
Referee in perfect position sends him off- indicating it was for the stamping action- a perfectly reasonable decision, certainly not the inexcusable one that its being made out to be. Really surprised at the opinion on here and that the club have appealed it, would be amazed if its overturned.
Also concerned at the 'you did nothing wrong' message it gives to Donnelly- the nature of the challenge, jumping two footed, full-frontal, studs first was stupid, reckless and cowardly- motivated by the frustration of his own fk up, and we ended up being lucky to take 3 points. |
I think you've proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is no way a two footed lunge. In fact, it is shown that his left leg is planted on the floor a good yard before the ball. I think Pic 3 is the crucial one for me. At that point, it is impossible to say which of the two players is the aggressor. George's problem is that he's got there about a tenth of a second too late. It wasn't the action of someone being cowardly, stupid or reckless - it was the actions of someone who had lost control of the ball and was trying to win it back.
I've said before that there's not evidence to suggest a mistake on the ref's part and therefore I can't see it being overturned. |  | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 08:31 - Sep 24 with 8000 views | wmgunit |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 23:09 - Sep 23 by dancdale |
Strange. At the time I thought it was a reasonable decision- that Donnelly had over-ran the ball and frustrated by his mistake, stupidly lunged studs first into a challenge, connecting with the players leg. After reading this thread I guessed I must have been wrong so had a look at the clip online.
I still really cant understand the strength of opinion against the decision.
Pic 1. The clearest wrongful action was the two footed jump he made into the challenge
Pic 2. He was always going to be, and was a clear second to the ball
Pic 3. Hunt has played the ball by this point and it is now going in the opposite direction- only reason it doesnt continue in that direction (in which case I think there would be fewer arguments) is that it then hits donnellys back leg
Pic 4. Donnellys foot comes down over the top of the ball, stamping down studs first into hunts leg with the momentum from the jump- potentially a leg breaker.
Referee in perfect position sends him off- indicating it was for the stamping action- a perfectly reasonable decision, certainly not the inexcusable one that its being made out to be. Really surprised at the opinion on here and that the club have appealed it, would be amazed if its overturned.
Also concerned at the 'you did nothing wrong' message it gives to Donnelly- the nature of the challenge, jumping two footed, full-frontal, studs first was stupid, reckless and cowardly- motivated by the frustration of his own fk up, and we ended up being lucky to take 3 points. |
Excellent stuff. Largely agree with this.
And on the issue of whether there was actually the contact was actually made on Hunt, it is irrelevant to the referee's decision according to the rulebook. It's a question of whether the action itself was dangerous not the outcome.
I concede that picture three could suggest that Hunt's tackle was equally dangerous.
There have indeed been some ludicrously adamant assertions that Donnelly was cheated on here. It's nowhere near as clear cut as that. | | | |
| Dale to appeal Donnelly decision on 08:32 - Sep 24 with 8000 views | fermin |
Donnelly's body language of pics 3 and 4 to me look like that of someone seeing a collision coming and trying to brace himself for it. In picture 3 both players have their feet in more or less the same position in relation to the ball. It looks like Donnelly was just a fraction later getting to the ball than the Accrington player which meant that the latter was the one who was caught. A fraction of a second the other way and Donnelly would have been the one caught. As there was clearly contact I can't see the FA overturning it based on their past record, even though it just looks like a 50-50 challenge. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
