Leandro Bacuna - Sold

[KevinGage]

If this was such a clear, blatant act of thuggery by Bacuna why did the ref need to ask the linesman exactly what had happened?

If he'd cleaned him out so brutally as to warrant a six game ban, surely it would have been obvious to everyone in the ground.

Human nature took over on this one, but more from the linesman than Bacuna. He probably knew as soon as Bacuna reacted the way he did that he'd got the initial decision wrong. But rather than face up to that, when the ref asked him what had occurred, he looked to switch the focus from his crap decision making.
"The big man hit me!" with bottom lip quivering. Total clart.  He could have diffused the whole thing there and then.

[Ad@m]

Jonjo Shelvey banned for 5 games for racsim.
Bacuna banned for 6 games for an altercation with the assistant ref.

How do the FA explain that?

Looking at it another way:

Verbal assault = 5 game ban
Physical assualt = 6 game ban

[ChicagoLion]

Can we appeal to have the ban extended?

[chrisw1]

If this was such a clear, blatant act of thuggery by Bacuna why did the ref need to ask the linesman exactly what had happened?

If he'd cleaned him out so brutally as to warrant a six game ban, surely it would have been obvious to everyone in the ground.

Human nature took over on this one, but more from the linesman than Bacuna. He probably knew as soon as Bacuna reacted the way he did that he'd got the initial decision wrong. But rather than face up to that, when the ref asked him what had occurred, he looked to switch the focus from his crap decision making.
"The big man hit me!" with bottom lip quivering. Total clart.  He could have diffused the whole thing there and then.

There's no way this should be on the linesman.  Decision aside, he handled himself fine.

The inconsistency in the punishment is the only thing at issue here.  That Bacuna deserved one is absolutely not in doubt.

[Malandro]

Jonjo Shelvey banned for 5 games for racsim.
Bacuna banned for 6 games for an altercation with the assistant ref.

How do the FA explain that?

Looking at it another way:

Verbal assault = 5 game ban
Physical assualt = 6 game ban

Valid point. Racism though, I'd be giving six month bans.

It just proves that the disciplinary body is not fit for purpose.

[Chris Jameson]

As soon as he did it I was surprised the ref didn't have the red out of his pocket but maybe he didn't see it. It was a moronic thing to do, heard on the radio this morning that there is a planned strike of amateur referees this weekend to highlight the verbal and physical abuse they are subjected to week in, week out. A six game ban is a decent message to send out.

[simon ward 50]

As soon as he did it I was surprised the ref didn't have the red out of his pocket but maybe he didn't see it. It was a moronic thing to do, heard on the radio this morning that there is a planned strike of amateur referees this weekend to highlight the verbal and physical abuse they are subjected to week in, week out. A six game ban is a decent message to send out.

My sentiments entirely

[Pete]

If this was such a clear, blatant act of thuggery by Bacuna why did the ref need to ask the linesman exactly what had happened?

If he'd cleaned him out so brutally as to warrant a six game ban, surely it would have been obvious to everyone in the ground.

Human nature took over on this one, but more from the linesman than Bacuna. He probably knew as soon as Bacuna reacted the way he did that he'd got the initial decision wrong. But rather than face up to that, when the ref asked him what had occurred, he looked to switch the focus from his crap decision making.
"The big man hit me!" with bottom lip quivering. Total clart.  He could have diffused the whole thing there and then.

There's no way this should be on the linesman.  Decision aside, he handled himself fine.

This is true. Bacuna's head touched the linesman's face, if it had been a player it's likely they would have gone down and rolled around clutching their head.

[KevinGage]

If this was such a clear, blatant act of thuggery by Bacuna why did the ref need to ask the linesman exactly what had happened?

If he'd cleaned him out so brutally as to warrant a six game ban, surely it would have been obvious to everyone in the ground.

Human nature took over on this one, but more from the linesman than Bacuna. He probably knew as soon as Bacuna reacted the way he did that he'd got the initial decision wrong. But rather than face up to that, when the ref asked him what had occurred, he looked to switch the focus from his crap decision making.
"The big man hit me!" with bottom lip quivering. Total clart.  He could have diffused the whole thing there and then.

There's no way this should be on the linesman.  Decision aside, he handled himself fine.

It's absolutely on him. He made the initial bad call that had half the ground in uproar, not just Bacuna.  He then compounded the error when the ref came over.

The ref had seemingly seen nothing untoward and was uncertain enough to ask the linesman.  That was his opportunity when asked what occurred to come out of the thing with a bit of credibility.  "A spirited exchange of views," or words to that effect and the whole thing is forgotten.

Instead Bacuna is now Di Canio incarnate, going by the (over) reaction of some here and in the press.

[chrisw1]

If this was such a clear, blatant act of thuggery by Bacuna why did the ref need to ask the linesman exactly what had happened?

If he'd cleaned him out so brutally as to warrant a six game ban, surely it would have been obvious to everyone in the ground.

Human nature took over on this one, but more from the linesman than Bacuna. He probably knew as soon as Bacuna reacted the way he did that he'd got the initial decision wrong. But rather than face up to that, when the ref asked him what had occurred, he looked to switch the focus from his crap decision making.
"The big man hit me!" with bottom lip quivering. Total clart.  He could have diffused the whole thing there and then.

There's no way this should be on the linesman.  Decision aside, he handled himself fine.

It's absolutely on him. He made the initial bad call that had half the ground in uproar, not just Bacuna.  He then compounded the error when the ref came over.

The ref had seemingly seen nothing untoward and was uncertain enough to ask the linesman.  That was his opportunity when asked what occurred to come out of the thing with a bit of credibility.  "A spirited exchange of views," or words to that effect and the whole thing is forgotten.

Instead Bacuna is now Di Canio incarnate, going by the (over) reaction by some here and in the press.

Absolute shite.  A poor decision is no excuse to act the way Bacuna did.  Even if the lino had washed over it they would have done him retrospectively.

[PeterWithesShin]

Just because the ref didn't see clearly what had happened doesn't change anything. It's one of the reasons they are there, to let the ref know what they saw that he didn't see clearly. The lino made a shit decision on the throw in, it doesn't excuse Bacuna acting like a dick. I like Bacuna but he acted like a dick and has been busted for it.

I have very little doubt that if we'd been 1 down and it was their player behaving as Bacuna did we'd be absolutely livid if the lino said nothing and the player stayed on.

[KevinGage]

If this was such a clear, blatant act of thuggery by Bacuna why did the ref need to ask the linesman exactly what had happened?

If he'd cleaned him out so brutally as to warrant a six game ban, surely it would have been obvious to everyone in the ground.

Human nature took over on this one, but more from the linesman than Bacuna. He probably knew as soon as Bacuna reacted the way he did that he'd got the initial decision wrong. But rather than face up to that, when the ref asked him what had occurred, he looked to switch the focus from his crap decision making.
"The big man hit me!" with bottom lip quivering. Total clart.  He could have diffused the whole thing there and then.

There's no way this should be on the linesman.  Decision aside, he handled himself fine.

It's absolutely on him. He made the initial bad call that had half the ground in uproar, not just Bacuna.  He then compounded the error when the ref came over.

The ref had seemingly seen nothing untoward and was uncertain enough to ask the linesman.  That was his opportunity when asked what occurred to come out of the thing with a bit of credibility.  "A spirited exchange of views," or words to that effect and the whole thing is forgotten.

Instead Bacuna is now Di Canio incarnate, going by the (over) reaction by some here and in the press.

Absolute shite.  A poor decision is no excuse to act the way Bacuna did.  Even if the lino had washed over it they would have done him retrospectively.

^^  overreaction.

That sort of po faced moralising would be more suited to lawn bowls.  Most games where the stakes were as high as they were on Saturday have the potential to boil over at some point. 

You hope in that situation for competent officials, or at least people that can take the heat out of a situation. We got neither on Sat.

[Ad@m]

The trouble is as soon as you say it's acceptable for a professional to get carried away in the heat of the moment you open the door to a Sunday morning amateur doing the same thing. Except I bet it's a lot more scary to your average Sunday morning ref.

[Chris Jameson]

Instead Bacuna is now Di Canio incarnate, going by the (over) reaction of some here and in the press.

I'm amazed anybody is attempting to defend or justify what Bacuna did, it's hardly an 'over reaction'. It was moronic and totally unnecessary. The linesman got a throw in decision it wrong, that's all

[martyn ellis]

Two points:
1. If the lino hadn't made such a blatantly appalling decision in the first place, it would never have happened.
2. I just saw Bacuna getting fairly understandably furious at said decision and moving towards the lino to vent his frustration.
3. I didn't see Bacuna move towards the lino with intention of making physical contact with him; his momentum moved him to within 'bumping' distance.