Date:         Thu, 2 Jan 2003 21:21:25 -0500
Reply-To:     Jim Mantle <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Jim Mantle <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Ref  screw up in 1-1-03 Liverpool vs. Newcastle
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

----- Original Message -----
From: "jack barry" <[log in to unmask]>
To: "Jim Mantle" <[log in to unmask]>; <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 4:35 PM
Subject: RE: Ref screw up in 1-1-03 Liverpool vs. Newcastle


> Jim:
>
> You are rebutting statements I didnot make.
>
> I agree that nothing excuses/condones dissent.
>
> It is SOLELY the issue of  "should the subsequent game
> suspension" be "waivable" by the Disc. Com.  Solely!.

So what you are saying is: The referee made a mistake, the player became
very aggravated at the action of the referee (which was contrary to what the
player wanted),  received a caution, then eventually received a second
caution, and now will miss a game BUT that he shouldn't get the additional
game because his initial outburst is mitigated because the referee made a
mistake.

I wait for the day when, in the World Cup final, a player is playing the
last game of his career having never won a World Cup, and the game is lost
when an opponent buries one in the back of the net in the second Golden Goal
period. The player, aggravated because the action of this opponent is
contrary to what the player wanted, proceeds to beat the living crap out of
his opponent. At the subsequent discipline hearing the player explains his
actions as being justifiable because his opponent dashed his lifelong
fdream, and therefore a future suspension (coaching, etc) should not be
levied.

Jim