FA think leg breaking is 'normal'

Following up on my recent efforts which have exposed the FA's completely incoherent and unjustifiable stance on dangerous tackling, I decided to get back in touch with the FA to see why they ignore limb threatening challenges and why they ignore their own handbook.

"It is the case that The FA may only take action in exceptional cases, and FIFA’s stance is that such use of this ruling must warrant truly exceptional circumstances. This would be for an incident which was outside the bounds of what might be considered to be a normal football challenge. This is where an incident is sufficiently serious in its nature to warrant a sanction over and above the applicable standard punishment having regard to the particular facts. We have recently spoken with FIFA to reaffirm our jurisdiction following this matter, and they have advised they are in agreement with our application of their rules."

The above is taken directly from the FA's reply and is in context. From this one can conclude that leg breaking challenges are 'normal' in the FA's book, it is unbelievable that they have said this in my opinion. De Jong's tackle on Ben Arfa was just 'normal' in the FA's book.

In recent weeks we have seen several tackles that should have been met with harsh retrospective punishment. These tackles were reckless, violent, overly forceful and jeopardised the safety of the opposing players. The FA simply can't be bothered to read their own guidelines, they feel leg breaking tackles do not warrant any sanction and they feel that they are 'normal challenges'. Words are failing me again, it is hard to describe just how cretinous and backwards these committee dwelling morons are.

Danny Murphy has told it how it is, Arsene Wenger continues to do so, Dario Gradi has joined in too. At least the FA's stance is now clear, they could act if they so wished, they have the power, they simply think that dangerous leg breaking tackles are a normal and acceptable part of the game. Leg breaking tackles should not be normal or acceptable, they must be punished properly, and the FA must not be allowed to rest until they are forced to see the light of day.

Fat Sam: the deluded lardy files continue

The deluded and foolish fat Sam Allardyce just can't keep his pie swilling mouth shut these days. First there was the talk of him being the most technical coach in the land, next was the claims that he would win the league every season if he managed a big club, and now more talk on how clean his Blackburn side are:

"The perception of Blackburn Rovers is the wrong one, in many, many cases and we have to live with it......The perception of Sam Allardyce is the wrong one, but I have to live with it."

It's all about perception with fat Sam, he actually isn't that fat, that's just the camera adding a few stone, he would also never order his sides to go out and be physically aggressive in a way that would see several members of the opposition stretchered off. My memories of his cheating violent Bolton side must just be a mis-perception then, those Arsenal players being stretchered off were also just a mis-perception. The likes of Allardyce see dangerous reckless tackles as just fair committed play. For example the repugnant Paul Robinson thought his reckless lunge on Diaby was just a hard fair tackle, utterly stupid.

Allardyce cites some statistics to back up his argument, a nonsensical approach given that referees rarely even award fouls for appallingly dangerous and reckless tackles. Ben Arfa's leg was broken and no foul was given, a cracking example of this problem we have with the poor officiating in this country. I like this amusing take on fat Sam's delusion over at offthepost. Danny Murphy should apologise for nothing, he is entitled to his opinion, as fat Sam is entitled to his stupid deluded opinion. The way in which various bullies are rounding on Murphy including Allardyce and the crony-led LMA shows what a corrupt footballing institution we have in this country. It is fantastic to hear an experienced and highly respected manager in Dario Gradi backing up Murphy's comments:

"You don't play good football if you're hot headed........I'm happy to see people make tackles. I'm just not happy for people to risk injury getting tackled"

Gradi makes some excellent points, including the one that those who tackle recklessly also risk their own limbs. It's just a great shame that the likes of Wenger and Gradi are in a massive minority in this country, if there were more of them then we may see less broken legs and a lot more decent football played, we also might have a much better selection of English players. Dangerous reckless tackling does not show commitment, it shows a complete disregards for one's fellow professional's limbs, it also shows a rank lack of skill and the inability to win the ball without being violent. It's a great shame that so many in our game's corrupt corridors of power cannot see the huge problem staring them in the face, the denial cannot go on forever.

Great to see Aaron back

It is just about eight months since Aaron Ramsey suffered his leg break against Stoke City, or should I say had his leg snapped by Ryan Shawcross' reckless late tackle. It is fantastic to see pictures of him back in training, it will be even better to see him back in competitive action. It is rumoured that he may return for the Reserves in November, meaning a first team date is most realistically going to be December time. It is worth remembering Shawcross' pathetic words after the incident:

"There was absolutely no malice in the challenge. I would never, ever go out to hurt a fellow professional."

There was malice in the challenge, there was excessive force which is by itself malicious, this equates to going out to hurt one's fellow professional. Enough on Shawcross, he's not worth any more comment than that.

Obviously Aaron's rehabilitation is being closely supervised by the Arsenal medical team, they will know well that he needs to be go fairly slowly after such a serious injury. Fortunately his injury was a distance above the ankle joint, meaning it is less likely to have niggling long term implications.

The main bone he broke, the tibia, does need to build up its strength and this is something that cannot be rushed. Bone strengthens and remodels in proportion to the stresses applied across it, this means that the rehab process must be fairly gradual and staged, it can take many months before the bone is a strong as it is going to get. There is no point in taking any chances, it is much better for him to take his time than to rush back and risk a run of niggling injuries.

There is some interesting stuff on the Arsenal site today, I found the article on Jack Wilshere's tactical thoughts very relevant. I have commented on our tactical naivety several times in the last five years or so, we are suckers for being beaten by good counter attacking play, while we have lost a bit of killer instinct on the counter ourselves. Part of this has been our lack of ability to defend and absorb pressure, while the rest of it has been down to a tactical naivety and a lack of pace in the side at times. We will never win the league while we are unable to grind out results, the way we continue to leak goals is quite alarming.

Finally the Peter Storey interview is worth listening to, his comments on tackling are very salient. His words which state 'players just don't know how to tackle properly' are very true. The art of tackling is sometimes forgotten by certain thugs in our league, there is a way to safely tackle firmly and fairly. Certain players need reminding of this, as do certain referees, as do our completely limp and incompetent FA who simply can't be bothered to do a thing about the negligent snapping of limbs.

A mirage?

Maybe I'm being naive and tempting fate with this, but it appears that we have gone through the International break without accumulating too more injuries, Bacary Sagna is the only injury that I am aware of. It's a bit like going out, getting smashed and waking up after two hours sleep feeling absolutely top notch. Strange that.

Nic Bendtner nears a return which is a welcome boost, Chamakh has been our only fit striker for quite a while now and it will be useful to have some extra options up top. Sagna did miss both France games due to a thigh problem, meaning Eboue is likely to start at right back this weekend. There are rumours that Theo is not far away, Gibbs is also close, Cesc is also very near, it is slightly ominous that there has not been much comment on Vermaelen and RVP.

Liam Brady has been talking of the next generation. Gibbs and Wilshere appear to be cementing their first team slots, while the likes of Lansbury and JET are pushing hard at the door. It is a shame Emmanuel Frimpong picked up his ACL injury at such an unfortunate time, he would be very close to starting a few games if it were not for that.

The goalkeeping situation remains interesting, there are other words that could also describe it. It appears that Vito Mannone is not quite as good as he thinks, maybe a spell out on loan would be ideal for him. It would seem likely that Lucasz Fabianski wil continue in goal, hopefully he can build on his last two solid performances.

Birmingham with the utterly inept Atkinson in charge will be a challenge, if the incompetent officials allow the likes of Ridgewell and Gardner to plough through our players with no due care then it will play into the Brummies' hands. Hopefully Atkinson can prove me wrong and have a decent game, I rather doubt it though.

Murphy backlash begins: LMA trot out the same old

The media has aired the biased views of the LMA who have responded to Danny Murphy's recent comments. It's barely worth repearing what they have to say, they have said nothing of note, it's just a few words designed to discredit Murphy's spot on remarks. The same old defense of the reckless career ending tackles is trotted out by the LMA:

'mistimed tackles by fractions of a second will happen and with that will be a potential risk of impact or injury but in no way does it follow that the actions are either deliberate or encouraged'

Utter utter rubbish from the LMA. The fact is that certain managers tell their players to go into games aggressively and to try to kick the other team off the park, it is an inevitable result of overly physical and aggressive tackling that players will have their careers ended prematurely by shocking injuries. Allardyce is on record saying that 'winning the ball at all costs' is acceptable, while Mark Hughes has been quoted to order his team to go out to aggressively kick the other off the park. The LMA is a disgrace, you simply cannot defend this kind of management.

The LMA and certain morons in the media should go back to the drawing board and actually bother to read the rules of the game. Tackling with excessive force and in a dangerous manner that endangers the safety of one's opponent is defined as 'serious foul play', it is not some innocent inevitability of trying to win the ball. This particularly lame piece of writing sums up the lack of cogency in these arguments, injuries are all just an inevitable part of playing a contact sport, what utter rot.

The media have a responsibility to get behind Danny Murphy, he has taken a massive risk in speaking out against something that is in danger of wrecking our game, instead our media are doing the opposite, they are allowing Murphy to be slated by people whose arguments have logic that could be picked apart by a three year old. As Rockylives says over at ArsenalArsenal, the media need to stand up and be counted on this issue.

All Danny Murphy said was that dangerous tackles need to be punished properly and that some teams are routinely going into tackles with excessive force, extremely sensible stuff. Murphy should not be scapegoated as he is going to be by the Neanderthal chavs who think that snapping bones is simply part and parcel of the game. The media should be ashamed of the way in which they have presented these issues to the public, the problem is that our culture means that the media are only writing what the majority of idiots will want to read, it is just sad that our footballing culture is so accepting of such reckless and malicious violence.

Discipline and the FA: murky waters

We have all known for a long time that the FA's disciplinary system is inconsistent and haphazard, Sir Alex Ferguson was the latest in a long line of people to point this out this year. Interestingly a large survey of over 500 figures in English club football earlier this year revealed that there was generally very little faith in the FA's disciplinary system:

"It is obvious that this survey shows what we all know – that the FA are blatantly inconsistent when it comes to dealing with disciplinary issues."

There is no doubt that as well as being random and inconsistent, the disciplinary system is far from transparent as well. The review of incidents is done by some people who have never even played football, while the independence of those who make up the disciplinary system is sadly lacking. This document is worth reading for those who want to know how the disciplinary system is structured.

The disciplinary commission is made up of three disciplinary committeemembers plus a member of the specialist panel comprised of former players, managers, referees and administrators; the quality and independence of this commission is clearly a big issue on its own. The 'How does the FA decide whether to charge?' section demonstrates the problem perfectly, it is fine when the match officials report the incident, but for incidents missed or inadequately punished by the officials there is no due process. This is also nothing but a shambles. The FA introduced some new systems to improve things this year but frankly they are nothing but some shoddy paper over the cracks.

The FA has a disciplinary handbook, the problem is that there seems to be no coherent and robust framework for consistently handling incidents that were missed by the match officials and for incidents that were inadequately punished by the match officials. As a result of this we see players and managers randomly charged by the FA as part of a media's knee jerk reaction to various incidents. Serious incidents are often ignored by the FA's system if the media make no fuss about it at the time. This is no way to run a fair disciplinary system.

As I revealed yesterday, the FA have the power to act retrospectively if they wish to stamp something violent and unpleasant out of the game such as dangerous leg breaking tackles. Their own handbook proves this. As some interesting reader comments yesterday made clear, why is such a useless, archaic and inconsistent system not being overhauled and improved? There must be some vested interests at work here. Who would not want the needless violence taken out of our game?

There is a credible explanation for this backwards state of affairs and I think it links up with the resignation of Ian Watmore as the FA's chief executive. There are obviously those who have the power at the FA and included here are the Premier League's chairman Dave Richards, the Bolton Chairman Phil Gartside and the Manchester United Chief Exective David Gill. Dave Richards is a particularly key figure and a rather powerful one too. The Premier League's power may well be linked in with the FA's dysfunctional nature and Watmore's resignation:

"There has been speculation in recent days about the fragile nature of Watmore’s relationship with Triesman, but his principal frustrations were over the corporate structure of the FA, in which the Premier League is a powerful force."

The FA's own guidance contradicts the FA

Given recent events and the violence in the game that the FA refuses to confront, I sent a list of questions to the FA. It was no surprise to me that the FA ignored all the hard questions and claimed that "The FA generally has no power to take retrospective action, due to FIFA directives. ". I found it strange that so many other countries (Belgium/Spain etc) were able to act on dangerous tackling retrospectively, even for incidents seen and punished by the match referee, while the FA was allegedly prevented from doing so by FIFA.

The FA were no help, so I turned to the Football ombudsman who was far more useful, he took the time to discuss things with the FA and he attempted to explain their position; he admitted that there was nothing explicit from FIFA that prevented the FA from acting: " it has been explained that there are not so much FIFA directives as FIFA interventions". In fact he said that it came down to page 332 in the FA's very own handbook:

"RULE E3 OF THE ASSOCIATION

A charge of Misconduct (as defined in and) pursuant to Rule E3 of the Rules of The
Association may be brought against a Player in relation to an incident, notwithstanding
that the same incident has been dealt with pursuant to this Memorandum. For example,
against a player who has been dismissed from the Field of Play for an incident which The
Association is satisfied was sufficiently serious to warrant an additional sanction, having
particular (but not exclusive) regard to the following:

(a) Any applicable Law(s) of the Game or Rules and Regulations or FIFA instructions
and/or guidelines;
(b) The nature of the incident, and in particular any intent, recklessness, negligence
or other state of mind of the Player;
(c) Where applicable, the level of force used;
(d) Any injury to any Participant caused by the incident;
(e) Any other impact on the game in which the incident occurred;
(f) The prevalence of the type of incident in question in football generally;
(g) The wider interests of football in applying consistent sanctions."

I couldn't help chuckling when I read this for the first time, it is quite clear from reading the above concerning rule E3 that the FA could easily act on this issue of dangerous tackling if they so wished. Their own guidance seems to encourage action on dangerous tackling.

Take as an example De Jong breaking Ben Arfa's leg. This was a tackle that broke the rules of the game (serious foul play- (a) on the FA's list), it was reckless and negligent (b), it used an excessive level of force (c) and it caused a serious injury (d), there are also the wider issues which relate to this kind of reckless tackle (f)(g). It ticks almost all of the FA's own boxes.

The FA has been caught with its pants down around its ankles on this issue. Other countries have acted on dangerous tackling (eg Witsel in Belgium and Ujfalusi in Spain) and FIFA has had no problem at all with this. Some rather high powered officals in FIFA are now speaking out on the very same issue. The FA have been so limp and ineffective in confronting dangerous tackling that clubs are being forced into letters of protest, the situation is that bad. It is now clear to me that the FA's hands are not tied, they could act but they simply chose not to for some strange reason only known to themselves.