Crosswords1 min ago
Sam Allardyce Charged Over Comments
http://
"There's no doubt about the difference between Rafael's handball and Jordan Spence's. Spence plays for West Ham and the away team, while Rafael plays for the home side at Old Trafford."
There's no denying he has a valid point here, big clubs do get the big decisions at home
"There's no doubt about the difference between Rafael's handball and Jordan Spence's. Spence plays for West Ham and the away team, while Rafael plays for the home side at Old Trafford."
There's no denying he has a valid point here, big clubs do get the big decisions at home
Answers
1 to 7 of 7
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by joeluke. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Rule E3 (1) A participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute,
A well-intentioned rule which is constantly abused by the FA. How well does the Rule lie with a person's right to freedom of speech? Allardyce is not being defamatory of the referee by suggesting that referee was dishonestly biased ( the words "in any manner which is improper", could , perhaps, be interpreted that way) but commenting on human nature. A recent report, mentioned in the press, from some university on home wins over the last 60 years or so showed that these were formerly much more common than in recent years. The deduction was that referees are better, and specifically, trained to resist the influence of the home crowd and overcome this natural tendency. However, the effect of a crowd baying for a decision could not be overlooked.
And the Rule has often been used in an attempt to gag 'participants' who would make any comment which the FA doesn't like. The words ' bring the game into disrepute' may have 'game' defined as the 'FA itself' or 'any official' or even 'any player or manager' and any criticism being held to be bringing the whole game into disrepute.
A well-intentioned rule which is constantly abused by the FA. How well does the Rule lie with a person's right to freedom of speech? Allardyce is not being defamatory of the referee by suggesting that referee was dishonestly biased ( the words "in any manner which is improper", could , perhaps, be interpreted that way) but commenting on human nature. A recent report, mentioned in the press, from some university on home wins over the last 60 years or so showed that these were formerly much more common than in recent years. The deduction was that referees are better, and specifically, trained to resist the influence of the home crowd and overcome this natural tendency. However, the effect of a crowd baying for a decision could not be overlooked.
And the Rule has often been used in an attempt to gag 'participants' who would make any comment which the FA doesn't like. The words ' bring the game into disrepute' may have 'game' defined as the 'FA itself' or 'any official' or even 'any player or manager' and any criticism being held to be bringing the whole game into disrepute.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
1 to 7 of 7
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.