Delph's dismissal

[dave shelley]

Deserved, no excuse.

[nigel]

I suppose the conspiracy theorists will be convinced he did it on purpose so he wouldn't be injured before his big move 

[Risso]

As I said in the match thread, a definite red.  Nowhere near the ball, and studs straight into the bloke's ankle.  Not malicious, but still a red.

[andyh]

Looks a red to me.
To be honest, it was no surprise he got sent off today. He looked well off his game today.
I said at half time he looked like he'd a row with him missus, because he seemed to be playing 'angry' with misplaced passes and shouting at team mates.
I hope big time charlie syndrome isn't starting to kick him with him.

[Matt C]

It's red. It's so clumsy and mistimed it looks like he's not tried to play the ball.

[Archie]

Red forever.

[SoccerHQ]

I was surprised when he got a red....only because I've seen Delph lung in countless times and always get a yellow.

Today was his first premier league sending off, I'm amazed he hasn't gone off before as he's always been a liability tackling so inevitable a ref wouldn't take a lenient view of it.

[pauliewalnuts]

if someone can put up the Konchesky red then you'll see they are both the same. Konchesky got nothing for his in the end but it should have been yellow. In my opinion Delph's challenge is no different in that it is equally wreckless, and unlike Konchesky he didn't follow up on the victim by taunting him.

They were not the same, in the Konchesky / Hutton melee there was forehead to forehead stuff, taunting (as you said) and general argy bargy. You can't just pretend that didn't happen, because it did.

not to mention running to the ref from both sides and general outbreaks of pushing and shoving. Those shouldn't affect the ref's decision, but they do, you can't just pretend they didn't happen.

[Nelly]

Red. Late, nasty lunge that he shouldn't have even attempted.

[phantom limb]

It's orange, some refs will send you off for that but others won't. It often depends upon who you play for, and our recent track record of players being sent off probably didn't help.

[Dave]

They were not the same, in the Konchesky / Hutton melee there was forehead to forehead stuff, taunting (as you said) and general argy bargy. You can't just pretend that didn't happen, because it did.

It did, but that's not the offence that Konchesky was sent off for.

He was sent off for the foul and Hutton was booked for his reaction.

[SoccerHQ]

Ref should never have happened btw as what lead to the throw in was Delph messing up what was a simply ball down the line to N'zogbia and he just kicked it out of play so that added to the frustration.

[pauliewalnuts]

They were not the same, in the Konchesky / Hutton melee there was forehead to forehead stuff, taunting (as you said) and general argy bargy. You can't just pretend that didn't happen, because it did.

It did, but that's not the offence that Konchesky was sent off for.

He was sent off for the foul and Hutton was booked for his reaction.

I know, but the thing i was getting at was that you can't just say "take it away" and pretend it didn't happen. It did, there was inflammation of tempers, generalised pushing and shoving, all things which will influence the referee one way or the other.

The referee in his notes will have said Konchesky was sent off for the foul, but there was enough extra nonsense going on to influence him, and today there wasn't

[mrfuse]

I'm sorry I watched it live and ive seen it numerous times its never a red. You can usually tell a bad tackle by the reaction of the players and there is no reaction except for disbelief from Villa players.

[ChicagoLion]

They were not the same, in the Konchesky / Hutton melee there was forehead to forehead stuff, taunting (as you said) and general argy bargy. You can't just pretend that didn't happen, because it did.

It did, but that's not the offence that Konchesky was sent off for.

He was sent off for the foul and Hutton was booked for his reaction.

Hutton deliberately made a meal of the challenge which was what angered Koncheskey (apparently they have history). The Koncheskey challenge was no where near as dangerous. I don't believe there was any intent by Delph it was just wreckless.
" A tackle with the shoe studs up are almost always considered grave foul play".

I know, but the thing i was getting at was that you can't just say "take it away" and pretend it didn't happen. It did, there was inflammation of tempers, generalised pushing and shoving, all things which will influence the referee one way or the other.

The referee in his notes will have said Konchesky was sent off for the foul, but there was enough extra nonsense going on to influence him, and today there wasn't