James Beatties sending off

[Muttley]

I'm a bit miffed about it to be honest. BT has done himself no favours here. I want him fully fit, and making an impact. I'm not with those who don't want him, just eager for him to do well. Now he has put himself out of the reckoning for 3 matches.

 

[manksitheblade]

well if hes banned he can have 3 weeks to get fit for udders and the pigs just his appearance concerned other teams i mean look at how happy Charlton were when he was sent off

 

[judge]

two things here for me
1 the charlton player who was wragging lowton around by the collar of his shirt should have gone
2 beattie should have had more sense than to see this and then react by grabbing the player by the throat

the james beattie i remember always had more sense than that

 

[TopBoy]

BT didn't travel back to Sheffield after the game but instead went to Southampton on the train to visit some family. Probably true but I just hope we've not paid him for 2 months to get fit before he buggers off. At least with his sending off he's not in the shop window now and has hardly been given the chance to impress with the 10 minute cameo appearances he's had since the turn of the year.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

if the Charlton player had approached the problem differently, we wouldn't be in a situation where 2 people are now being charged with offences.

Another crap attempt at trolling by Boo radley's white knight. We aren't in a situation where two people are charged with offences as to my knowledge kermogant hasn't been charged with anything.

Nice try....

 

[Trigger Blade]

BT didn't travel back to Sheffield after the game but instead went to Southampton on the train to visit some family. Probably true but I just hope we've not paid him for 2 months to get fit before he buggers off. At least with his sending off he's not in the shop window now and has hardly been given the chance to impress with the 10 minute cameo appearances he's had since the turn of the year.

He definitely got a train from Charlton station, he was spotted by eagle-eyed Trig Jnr (TY), as we sat for ages in a completely static queue outside the Antigallican pub, due to non-functioning traffic lights. He was dragging a wheeled suitcase and didn't seem to have a care in the world.

To be fair, short of wearing a dunce's hat, I can't say how I think he should have looked.

 

[stannyblade]

He definitely got a train from Charlton station, he was spotted by eagle-eyed Trig Jnr (TY), as we sat for ages in a completely static queue outside the Antigallican pub, due to non-functioning traffic lights. He was dragging a wheeled suitcase and didn't seem to have a care in the world.

To be fair, short of wearing a dunce's hat, I can't say how I think he should have looked.

To be fair to him what is there for him to worry about? Its only a job to them after all

 

[super_pig]

>After watching it again and again, i'm convinced that the charlton player was trying to drag Lowton away from the melee
yeah right brother.. guffaws

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Seriously!

 

[Jehovah]

Im not too upset with Beattie. That kermoghanmghanmanhont was raping Lowton and Beattie reacted. Should he know better? Yes of course but a rush of blood while defending his team mate doesnt seem so bad to me.

 

[Darren]

To be fair to him what is there for him to worry about? Its only a job to them after all

I have little doubt Beattie is set up for life and never needs to work again. To be honest, the SUFC job is probably a bit of a hobby to him, hence he is not going to be as upset as you or I might be if we messed up at our work as the possible consequences - losing his job - don't really matter to him.

 

[boo radley]

So about as honourable as the Bloke on the Scottish train then?

Nice trolling attempt boo!

if the Charlton player had approached the problem differently, we wouldn't be in a situation where 2 people are now being charged with offences.

So me trying to point out the hypocrisy of the situations being judged differently is trolling, fair enough it does not take away that hypocrisy. Now we are going to discuss why the situations are different. Dress Lowton and the Charlton player in going out gear and put them on the street on a friday night. The Charlton player looks different yanking at lowtons best shirt now doesn't he. The football pitch is subject to the same laws of the land as anywhere else but hey its a honourable place.
Stop having a go at me because someone else sees pitfalls in your argument.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Put them in town on a friday night and it still wouldn't matter. Kermagant pulled on lowton's shirt, but the motives for that remain unclear. We know what the motives of the guy on the train were.

Nothing hypocritical about it at all.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Posted this before I read this thread:

Do you think Kermorgant would claim to also have defended his own teammate who was getting a right telling off from Lowton? If so Beattie and Kermorgant may have both had the same intent, but while Beattie's throat grapping probably deserved a red, Kermorgant's shirt pulling may only have been a yellow?

I think Highbury is very objective when analysing the situation. Kermorgant's shirt pulls are a bit bullyish and provocative too, but not red card stuff.

Beattie should get involved in such situations, but he should use his experience, body size and authority to step in and separate players rather than strangling one of them.

 

[boo radley]

Put them in town on a friday night and it still wouldn't matter. Kermagant pulled on lowton's shirt, but the motives for that remain unclear. We know what the motives of the guy on the train were.

Nothing hypocritical about it at all.

Yes there is. you point out in the train thread that pollock had no right to lay a hand on the kid. Simply by the same logic Kermagant had no right to lay a hand on Lowton.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

I pointed out in the train thread that the bloke had no right to use excessive force.

 

[boo radley]

I pointed out in the train thread that the bloke had no right to use excessive force.

Judgement call!

 

[Darren]

The football pitch is subject to the same laws of the land as anywhere else but hey its a honourable place.

Not correct actually. If you involve yourself in sports like football, you are held to have implicitly consented to a certain degree of force being applied to you that would constitute an assault if it took place off the football field (that applies even when the force used is against the laws of the game).

So what constitutes an assault in the high street would not necessarily be an assault on the football field.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Judgement call!

Of course it's a judgement call. I always said that in my opinion the guy used excessive force. Point out to me where I've said that no-one should be allowed to lay a finger on anyone else.

 

[Hollinsend]

Posted this before I read this thread:



I think Highbury is very objective when analysing the situation. Kermorgant's shirt pulls are a bit bullyish and provocative too, but not red card stuff.

Beattie should get involved in such situations, but he should use his experience, body size and authority to step in and separate players rather than strangling one of them.

Kermorgant got a yellow, which was lenient considering his part in the incident

 

[SESKU Blade]

Beattie should have know better than letting a bit of red mist creep in but I can see why he did it. If you look closely the charlton player tries grabbing/pulling Lowton away by the neck before deciding to try and rip his shirt off.

He was lucky not to have seen red

 

[JJ Sefton]

Not correct actually. If you involve yourself in sports like football, you are held to have implicitly consented to a certain degree of force being applied to you that would constitute an assault if it took place off the football field (that applies even when the force used is against the laws of the game).

So what constitutes an assault in the high street would not necessarily be an assault on the football field.

I was wondering about that. When you think of rugby there would be nobody left on the pitch.

 

[WilsonsWizards]

Shut up please about this was a disgrace Beattie should not have done it. Yes maybe he shouldn't of looking back on it but everyone makes mistakes! He will be gutted that's he gone for next. 3 however if we do not give him a new contract I will personally walk to bramall lane with a broken leg and post my season ticket through mccabes office! He may of been inexperienced on Saturday but that was Saturday come April/May he's exactly the type of player we need fans faviourate and such a nice friendly lad!

 

[boo radley]

Not correct actually. If you involve yourself in sports like football, you are held to have implicitly consented to a certain degree of force being applied to you that would constitute an assault if it took place off the football field (that applies even when the force used is against the laws of the game).

So what constitutes an assault in the high street would not necessarily be an assault on the football field.

It would if play had stopped.Yes I'm sure that consent applies to when the game is in play. As the game was actually stopped by the guy who was policing the game does the same apply I doubt it. I'm sure all or nearly all on here have seen a lot of incidents during play being questioned, one including our own injured Captain. You know the difference. It would be nice if you'd answered some questions that I have asked of you that were asked from a point of ignorance or lack of knowledge on my part that I believed you could answer from your experience and knowledge from your proffessional position. No you just want to pick on what you see in me as a non intellectual giant of this forum who you wish to embarrass.
Its a shame the respect is unrequited.

---------- Post added at 11:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:29 PM ----------

Of course it's a judgement call. I always said that in my opinion the guy used excessive force. Point out to me where I've said that no-one should be allowed to lay a finger on anyone else.

And the charlton player did not? Sorry I get it now,if Pollock had just dragged the kid off the train on to the platform that would mean he had honourable intent.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Did Lowton receive any injuries from kermogant?

 

[boo radley]

Did Lowton receive any injuries from kermogant?

Sorry forgot to put a ? on the below, please accept it as a question.

And the charlton player did not? Sorry I get it now,if Pollock had just dragged the kid off the train on to the platform that would mean he had honourable intent.

 

[Bladesway]

Oh FFS, yes the guy was an idiot and shouldn't have done what he did given the circumstances. I just wonder if anyone has ever played the game, be it parks pitches or 5 a side on a Wednesday night. If you have then I would be most surprised if you haven't ever over reacted to a situation. Your playing a compeitive sport and emotions run high. I am sure Beattie is gutted he got sent off and regrets it. If he had done nothing and stood there I am sure some people would be saying hes over paid and doesn't care enough.

Bloke can't win when the hanging judges come into town on S2 can he?

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Not correct actually. If you involve yourself in sports like football, you are held to have implicitly consented to a certain degree of force being applied to you that would constitute an assault if it took place off the football field (that applies even when the force used is against the laws of the game).

So what constitutes an assault in the high street would not necessarily be an assault on the football field.

It would if play had stopped.Yes I'm sure that consent applies to when the game is in play. As the game was actually stopped by the guy who was policing the game does the same apply I doubt it. I'm sure all or nearly all on here have seen a lot of incidents during play being questioned, one including our own injured Captain.

Big Dunc Ferguson got convicted and jailed for a headbutt that was during the passage of play, whilst he was playing for rangers, so neither of the above statements are true.

Beattie's actions would probably warrant a charge of Common Assault by CPS charging guidelines. (I don't agree that he should be charged with common assault before anyone starts....)


---------- Post added at 09:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:57 AM ----------

And the charlton player did not? Sorry I get it now,if Pollock had just dragged the kid off the train on to the platform that would mean he had honourable intent?

Depends on how he did the dragging. If it was like he did in the video, and the kid ended up with the same injuries then no. Intent and execution are two different things. As Bergen says, if Kermogant's intentions were honourable, his actions were a bit clumsy. But if he was subsequently charged by the FA, then i would certainly expect his defence to be that he was dragging Lowton away from the melee.

 

[Darren]

Big Dunc Ferguson got convicted and jailed for a headbutt that was during the passage of play, whilst he was playing for rangers, so neither of the above statements are true.

Beattie's actions would probably warrant a charge of Common Assault by CPS charging guidelines. (I don't agree that he should be charged with common assault before anyone starts....)


---------- Post added at 09:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:57 AM ----------





Depends on how he did the dragging. If it was like he did in the video, and the kid ended up with the same injuries then no. Intent and execution are two different things. As Bergen says, if Kermogant's intentions were honourable, his actions were a bit clumsy. But if he was subsequently charged by the FA, then i would certainly expect his defence to be that he was dragging Lowton away from the melee.

Actually my statement is true. You see the word "neccesarily" in my second paragraph. You can commit a criminal assault on the football field if the degree of force goes beyond what one might reasonably expect to be subjected to by participating in the game. Thus being tripped or having your shirt pulled would not be assaults on the football field (though they would be on the high street); being headbutted would be an assault on the football field as elsewhere.

The Beattie situation is debateable. You wouldn't expect to have someone put their hands round your throat on the football field, so you are probably right that it was technically an assault. However, I suspect that if anyone did report JB for common assault, the CPS would not prosecute on public interest grounds.

---------- Post added at 09:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 AM ----------

It would if play had stopped.Yes I'm sure that consent applies to when the game is in play. As the game was actually stopped by the guy who was policing the game does the same apply I doubt it. I'm sure all or nearly all on here have seen a lot of incidents during play being questioned, one including our own injured Captain. You know the difference. It would be nice if you'd answered some questions that I have asked of you that were asked from a point of ignorance or lack of knowledge on my part that I believed you could answer from your experience and knowledge from your proffessional position. No you just want to pick on what you see in me as a non intellectual giant of this forum who you wish to embarrass.
Its a shame the respect is unrequited.

---------- Post added at 11:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:29 PM ----------



And the charlton player did not? Sorry I get it now,if Pollock had just dragged the kid off the train on to the platform that would mean he had honourable intent.

I fail to see how my reply to you is in any way disrespectful. I anaswer your point in my response to HB.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

Given his age and years of playing at the level he has, Beattie was a total pillock. From where I was stood, Charlton players seemed so incensed by the red card that if Blades players had not reacted they would have had one or two more sent-off. Referees will always look to even things up if they get the chance, Beattie handed him that on a silver platter!