Extended bans??

[Deathy]

Prove it's malicious though. Not so easy. But agree that if you can they should be punished far greater than they are currently.

[T.R.O.L.I.]

Haven't seen Pogatetz's challenge so I can't comment on that but in the case of Danny Guthrie - definitely. The fact that he had two goes at Fagan - the second of which bordered on GBH - and only got a 3 match ban is farcical.

[Platypuss]

The laws already cover serious foul play and violent conduct - seeing as these kinds of leg-breaking challenges we have seen recently have been going on for decades, the laws and disciplinary sanctions were drawn up to already encompass such challenges. Are you suggesting new additional levels? Really serious foul play etc?

The problem has been that refs are now directed to more harshly punishing the less severe offences (any tackle from behind which takes the man first is serious foul play etc) - which then leave the authorities less room to manoeuvre when we have truly horrific challenges.

[papereyes]

I don't see much of a problem with a panel of experienced refs and ex-players, elected from a pool for a season, who meet once a week to give further punishments for 'bringing the game into disrepute': diving, unpunished dissent, horrific tackles.

If you punish it consistently and hard, then it will start to die out.

[TFF]

Haven't seen Pogatetz's challenge so I can't comment on that but in the case of Danny Guthrie - definitely. The fact that he had two goes at Fagan - the second of which bordered on GBH - and only got a 3 match ban is farcical.

Saw the tackle on SSN and was ready to defend the guy. He went through the ball rather than over it so unlike the Guthrie incident I would think it difficult to prove intent.

Then again Pogatetz does have form http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYuftSg8jO0 (watch this through your fingers)

[Deathy]

It's only a United player. Knight him.

[papereyes]

I don't see much of a problem with a panel of experienced refs and ex-players, elected from a pool for a season, who meet once a week to give further punishments for 'bringing the game into disrepute': diving, unpunished dissent, horrific tackles.

If you punish it consistently and hard, then it will start to die out.

That seems reasonable. Obviously you need to demonstrate intent etc, which would see some players get away with it, but I think that career-threatening tackles need a greater punishment than a 3 match ban.

Intent is an odd one as you probably can't ever prove it. However, I think you would be able to see tackles that, although dangerous, are merely clumsy or ill-timed.
At the heart of it 'bringing the game into disrepute' would cover enough bases - both bad tackles and dives, for example.

[T.R.O.L.I.]

The past week has seen two horrendous tackles, both resulting in straight red cards for the offenders and at least one broken leg (and one suspected) for the victims.

No broken leg for Possebon - http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 96,00.html

[Ian Royal]

I don't see much of a problem with a panel of experienced refs and ex-players, elected from a pool for a season, who meet once a week to give further punishments for 'bringing the game into disrepute': diving, unpunished dissent, horrific tackles.

If you punish it consistently and hard, then it will start to die out.

That seems reasonable. Obviously you need to demonstrate intent etc, which would see some players get away with it, but I think that career-threatening tackles need a greater punishment than a 3 match ban.

Intent is an odd one as you probably can't ever prove it. However, I think you would be able to see tackles that, although dangerous, are merely clumsy or ill-timed.
At the heart of it 'bringing the game into disrepute' would cover enough bases - both bad tackles and dives, for example.

sounds good to me. I'd add feigning injury too. The more spectacular cases obviously. Where there is clearly no contact, or contact in a location other than that held in agony.

[eleventh earl of mar]

I don't see much of a problem with a panel of experienced refs and ex-players, elected from a pool for a season, who meet once a week to give further punishments for 'bringing the game into disrepute': diving, unpunished dissent, horrific tackles.

If you punish it consistently and hard, then it will start to die out.

Are there any ex players who would be prepared to say that a fellow player has set out to injure someone? All you ever get from anyone involved in the game for these types of fouls is that it was unintentional and an accident, even though most other people watching know that it is not true.

[papereyes]

I don't see much of a problem with a panel of experienced refs and ex-players, elected from a pool for a season, who meet once a week to give further punishments for 'bringing the game into disrepute': diving, unpunished dissent, horrific tackles.

If you punish it consistently and hard, then it will start to die out.

Are there any ex players who would be prepared to say that a fellow player has set out to injure someone? All you ever get from anyone involved in the game for these types of fouls is that it was unintentional and an accident, even though most other people watching know that it is not true.

Probably. Somewhere. Maybe the odd old, respected manager could be included.

[eleventh earl of mar]

I don't see much of a problem with a panel of experienced refs and ex-players, elected from a pool for a season, who meet once a week to give further punishments for 'bringing the game into disrepute': diving, unpunished dissent, horrific tackles.

If you punish it consistently and hard, then it will start to die out.

Are there any ex players who would be prepared to say that a fellow player has set out to injure someone? All you ever get from anyone involved in the game for these types of fouls is that it was unintentional and an accident, even though most other people watching know that it is not true.

Probably. Somewhere. Maybe the odd old, respected manager could be included.

Unfortunately Jimmy Sirrel died this week.

[papereyes]

I was actually thinking of someone like Graham Taylor or Bobby Robson. Usually willing to speak their mind but generally respected around the game.

[soggy biscuit]

I was actually thinking of someone like Graham Taylor or Bobby Robson. Usually willing to speak their mind but generally respected around the game.

Might have to be a short term contract

[papereyes]

Yup. And?