I'm pleased in a way but not in another. I don't think it was a red card offence, it was what I'd call 'taking one for the team' which you see so often. Someone who brings a man down when the opposing team are on the break. It wasn't cynical, he wasn't the last man and just inside his own half it was still far from a goal scoring opportunity. I'm just disappointed that when the FA do finally make a correct decision it's in favour of a team in the big 4.

It's strange to see the FA grant an appeal that's for sure. It definitely wasn't a red card, but still, there's been lots of offences where the card shown was a red, when infact it should have been a yellow, so it's a bit inconsistent on the FA's behalf really. I can see why Chelsea were so annoyed, as it does happen a lot in football nowdays where players take one for the team in the last few minutes and for the majority of the time, they don't even get a yellow.

Personally, I believe that Terry should have been sent off during this Game because he got away with a near assault in the first half which although spotted was not dealt with in the correct manner.

 

No doubt at half time the word got to Mark Halsey that he had let John Terry get away with that offence, hence when he had the excuse because of that deliberate professional/cynical foul in the second half he did a case of two wrongs making a right and showed him a red card.

 

However, Halsey ruled that it was serious foul play, (not on the last line of defence which would be a red card offence,) which it clearly was not. Therefore the FA could only rule on that charge, and find that Terry was not guilty of it. If they had the power to impose their own cards, they might well have changed the charge to "deliberate and cynical foul" and kept the red, but sadly IMHO, they don't...

 

.... and hence a big 4 club gets away (yet again) with something undermining the authority of the match officials.

I haven't seen the tackle so I can't really judge it, but no doubt if it was a Boro player the red would have stood and a game added to the ban <_< ala Aliadiere style

Personally, I believe that Terry should have been sent off during this Game because he got away with a near assault in the first half which although spotted was not dealt with in the correct manner.

 

No doubt at half time the word got to Mark Halsey that he had let John Terry get away with that offence, hence when he had the excuse because of that deliberate professional/cynical foul in the second half he did a case of two wrongs making a right and showed him a red card.

 

However, Halsey ruled that it was serious foul play, (not on the last line of defence which would be a red card offence,) which it clearly was not. Therefore the FA could only rule on that charge, and find that Terry was not guilty of it. If they had the power to impose their own cards, they might well have changed the charge to "deliberate and cynical foul" and kept the red, but sadly IMHO, they don't...

 

.... and hence a big 4 club gets away (yet again) with something undermining the authority of the match officials.

I'm not a big believer in the "big four conspiracy theory". However, this decision can only give further ammunition to those who do support it. For the reasons you've given, I think a red card was justified.

Failing to extend Danny Guthrie's ban proves they're still idiots afterall...

Any money you like, if it was a PNE player in the same circumstances, the appeal would have been unsuccessful. <_<

I think once the decision is made, it should stick.

It wouldn't have changed for any other club!

Even Scolari was surprised that it was dropped