Was it a sending off?

Comment Deleted by Article Creator

Clearly states that it is only for denying goal scoring opportunity

Sending-off offences
A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off if he commits any of the following seven offences:
• serious foul play
• violentconduct
• spitting at an opponent or any other person
• denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity
by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within
his own penalty area)
• denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving
towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a
penalty kick
• using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
• receiving a second caution in the same match

I don't see intent here, simply denying a goal or goal scoring opportunity

I think you're focussing too much on the written rules. Yes, they are the rules, but watch exactly what is happened and make your own judgement. Think about being in Chamberlains shoes. He saw that ball coming and clearly assumed it was going in, as if he didn't, he would have left it, no? So he tried to stop it with his hand. As soon as he does that, he no longer deserves to compete in the match, as he blatantly tried to cheat Chelsea out of what was in his mind, a certain goal.

Intent is not in the rules. A professional foul is not a sending off if another player is coming around to cover. The intent might be there, but the ref doesn't send the player off for thinking he was last man and making the foul!!!

It is an irrelevance.

A sending off is for denying a goal scoring opportunity, as this was not a goal scoring opportunity it is not a sending off.

I would say that it was as much of a goal scoring opportunity as when a player is one on one with the keeper, in Chamberlains mind, and he was the one who committed the offence. He didn't know for certain if it was going to be a goal, but he certainly thought it could be and purposely made an attempt to illegally stop it, which is basically what a defender who commits a professional foul does.

I can honestly see why in the rules you make the point that it wasn't a certain goal but sometimes you just have to use logic. For me personally, as soon as I saw him do it I lost a lot of respect for him, it's one of the worst types of cheating I can think of, and I'd say that about any player on any team who did the same.

comment by SpursBoy™ (U5652)
_______________________-

First, it's difficult to tell where the ball is going. Second, Oxlade obviously thinks it's going in when he does it and it is a cynical. It's a close enough decision for the ref's red to be justified. Arsenal were all over the place, I'd be more focused on that than questioning the merits of it being red or not.

The ball was going wide!! The tv angle couldn't be more perfect to show that.

My point is that if someone tries to cynically foul down a player and he thinks he's last man, but it just so happens that a team mate is behind to cover, he only gets a yellow. Intent is not a valid rule change.

It's reasonably reactionary on the goal line, he's trying to throw his head at it as well. And should it be going in, it's a straight red, but this should simply be a penalty and a booking. The punishment is having the stupidity to deny a goal kick and get a penalty instead!!!

Apparently arsenal are appealing the red card.

He shoots he scores