Cahill red card.

[alwaysaclaret]

Mark Clattenburg, and Shay Given seem to be trying to make excuses for Cahill's red card, imo no matter which way you look at it, it was a dangerous tackle and deserving of a red card, it makes you wonder what they'd be saying had it been the other way round, thoughts please ? In contrast maybe fabregas should have had a strong talking to for his first yellow but he too can have no complaints about the tackle which sent him off.

[FactualFrank]

I think it was a harsh decision. I think it was a yellow card offence in terms of intent and what he did.

[Saxoman]

I think it was a harsh decision. I think it was a yellow card offence in terms of intent and what he did.

Agree. I've seen many yellows for similar.

[Vegas Claret]

Neither can have a complaint especially Fabregas, big difference is that Cahil was respectful and Fabregas acted like the little **** he is

[BurnleyPaul]

By the rules of the game currently Cahill HAD to see a red card for that tackle.

It was high, studs were showing and it was out of control.

There can be no debate over it whatsoever.

The interesting thing is that the number of red cards during this first round of games should hopefully set out a sensible tone for the season re: discipline, behaviour on the pitch etc. Some teams need to be very careful or they might be ending games with 10 or even 9 players regularly!

[Claret82]

Fabregas tackle was straight red IMO

Cahill red according to rules

Shay Given is giving his opinion based on how it looked rather than the rules - Straight red IMO

[joey13]

It was a straight red , it's not even up for debate , even though I'm debating it

[FactualFrank]

Shay Given is giving his opinion based on how it looked rather than the rules

As am I. It was a pretty innocuous challenge. He showed no aggression, but it's just an unfortunate one really. There was no intent.

[Leisure]

[quote="FactualFrank"]As am I. It was a pretty innocuous challenge. He showed no aggression, but it's just an unfortunate one really. There was no intent.[/quote]

Just your uneducated opinion!

[FactualFrank]

Just your uneducated opinion!

Crikey, you're obsessed!
I know you look up to me, but please. That is slightly worrying.

[Vegas Claret]

As am I. It was a pretty innocuous challenge. He showed no aggression, but it's just an unfortunate one really. There was no intent.

Agree there was zero intent but it's irrelevant as it was studs up and dangerous, had to go.

[MACCA]

Similar to Jeff at Watford last season, just glad we had a strong ref, because usually any 50/50 ( not that it was 50/50 ) call goes with the big sides, especially at home.

Well done the officials, got every decision right, and I've watched 3 lots of extended highlights.

[ClaretTony]

Cahill - clear red, rules are rules and as joey13 says, not even up for debate - even Cahill knew what it was
David Luiz - got away with it when he could have gone
Fabregas, 1st yellow ref has no option, fortunate not to get a second later and then the second he did get could have been a straight red

[FactualFrank]

Agree there was zero intent

Yep. It's a shame sometimes because I feel that the referee should be allowed more room for his decision. This is an example imo where the studs were showing, but there was no intent.

[PaintYorkClaretnBlue]

Yep. It's a shame sometimes because I feel that the referee should be allowed more room for his decision. This is an example imo where the studs were showing, but there was no intent.

I agree, however the rules are clear, it was a red card.

Shearer summed it up well, you don't want to see players sent off for tackles like that but by the rules it was a clear red.

[bfccrazy]

Yep. It's a shame sometimes because I feel that the referee should be allowed more room for his decision. This is an example imo where the studs were showing, but there was no intent.

The officials and the players know the rules though - if he didnt want a red then he shouldnt have gone in high .... In the moment or not.

The rules are there to protect the players more than anything as an out of control high tackle could put a player out for 6 months whether it was with intent or not. If that had been Mee going in on one of the Chelsea superstars then it would have been dissected from 20 angles and at 30 dif speeds to show how it can hurt a player.

I feel we've finally got players that don't cheat - but know when to go down and when to stay on their feet which is as much a Prem skill as a lot of others. So many times we've been too honest - but those tackles both had the potential to put a player out for months and were rightly judged and by the book.

[Rileybobs]

Alonso was also slightly fortunate to only be booked for a similar rash challenge about 5 minutes earlier. As someone else said, at least Cahill acted with a little dignity. The rest of the Chelsea side were an embarrassment and it wasn't a surprise to see the odious little prick Fabregas leading the way.

[FactualFrank]

I agree, however the rules are clear, it was a red card.

Yeah don't get me wrong. The rules are the rules. I just feel they should be changed slightly. Perhaps give the referee more room to decide for himself. He's not a robot, afterall. Let him decide for himself on tackles like that.

[PaintYorkClaretnBlue]

Alonso was also slightly fortunate to only be booked for a similar rash challenge about 5 minutes earlier. As someone else said, at least Cahill acted with a little dignity. The rest of the Chelsea side were an embarrassment and it wasn't a surprise to see the odious little prick Fabregas leading the way.

Chelsea were like petulant children, they should be ashamed but I suspect that they're not!

[Claretmatt4]

I didn't think it was a lunge but a slide so he had full control. It was a second too late and as a result he caught defour.

I can see why he got sent off but I'd be disappointed if it was a Burnley player sent off for that.

Nothing like Hendrick v Watford, he flew in off the ground two footed.

[joey13]

Surely going in with your foot off the floor showing your studs is clearly showing intent

[Rileybobs]

It's worth mentioning Defour's role in this. He's clever at making the most of being fouled - it's probably the European flair that the rest of the squad lack. Xhaka (I think) was sent off at the Emirates for a similar foul on Defour. Mee would have been straight back up on his feet and the ref may have thought twice.

[PaintYorkClaretnBlue]

Yeah don't get me wrong. The rules are the rules. I just feel they should be changed slightly. Perhaps give the referee more room to decide for himself. He's not a robot, afterall. Let him decide for himself on tackles like that.

I tend to agree, however that's when you get inconsistencies between refs.

[taio]

Clear red card according to the laws of the game because it comes under the definition of serious foul play. Anyone who doesn't agree it should have been a red card is disagreeing with the rules rather than the ref's decision.

[PaintYorkClaretnBlue]

It's worth mentioning Defour's role in this. He's clever at making the most of being fouled - it's probably the European flair that the rest of the squad lack. Xhaka (I think) was sent off at the Emirates for a similar foul on Defour. Mee would have been straight back up on his feet and the ref may have thought twice.

That's coz Mee is feckin hard!! Did you see his attempt to put his head on it whilst he was on the floor and others were kicking? My favourite player!!

[elwaclaret]

By the rules stand the ref got both right, though the second could have been a straight red in its own right.

I think the rules are harsh, though at up to £200m a player I can understand them. But at the end of all the debate rules is rules. They had to go.

[bfccrazy]

It's worth mentioning Defour's role in this. He's clever at making the most of being fouled - it's probably the European flair that the rest of the squad lack. Xhaka (I think) was sent off at the Emirates for a similar foul on Defour. Mee would have been straight back up on his feet and the ref may have thought twice.

It's somethin that seems to come with top league experience ..... Hendrick had to literally be taken to the floor by Kante to go down with 3 players around him....... Cork/Defour know when to take a knee.

It's that grey area of the game like the strikers who invite a foul in the box or leave their leg trailing just to get a pen ala Vardy. It's the side a lot of us don't like - but it's the side of the game that if we don't also partake in, gives us a disadvantage in this league. The time of "honest Burnley" is over .... Time to become a proper, established Prem team now.

[bfcmik]

Chelsea and the other top sides were the ones pressing hardest to have the referee's discretion taken away as they felt their superstars were being insufficiently protected because of refs giving the benefit of the doubt to less skilful players. Intent is not measurable so it has to be a straight red and Fabregas should be looking at a 3 game ban for dangerous play rather than the 1 game he gets for 2 yellows.

This isn't a new rule, it was brought in at least 4 years ago, so players have had lots of time to get used to the idea.

[dsr]

Cahill's foul from some angles looked a clear and definite red, from others no so clear. It won't be overturned, but if it had been a booking it wouldn't have been a clear error (or a controversy) IMO.

Fabregas and Luis could, and probably should, both have got straight red cards. I think putting your head into someone's face is a sending-off offence even if it isn't done with force, and Fabregas was certainly out of control at best - I shouldn't be surprised if he was actually going for the man. Put it this way, he didn't look upset that he missed. I wonder if his reaction afterwards was genuine disbelief that he'd got a booking (could he be that stupid?) or just an "I play for Chelsea, you can't send me off" reaction? Or just acting?

[Quicknick]

The tw4t deserved to be off.

[ExistentialWanderer]

It's a moot point. According to the letter of the law, or if you're Dion Dublin 'The laws of the letter' it was a sending off offence.
Cahill knew it as soon as he stood up. Harsh maybe but pretty much the overall majority of pundits, media, fans (Chelsea fans apart of course) agree it was a red card offence.
As stated above. Fabregas' first was another one where he should know better, he should have had a second card for a tackle before the offence which, yet again; pundits agree would have been a straight red anyway.
There was another Chelsea player who should have seen red as well, but his name escapes me.

[Colburn_Claret]

They were both straight reds. I feel for Cahill as there was obviously no intent, but the fact is he was high, studs up, and caught Defour. Ref had no alternative.

[ClaretRock]

I agree from the refs angle he could see everything and it looked bad even though I doubt there was any intent. I was surprised to see the red as usually you would expect that refs would bottle it with it being the first 15 mins of the first game of the season.

[Dom]

Referee got most of the big decisions right. Fabregas should have been given a straight red and Cahill's was 100% a red. Chelsea really are odious though, from playing staff to fans, a right bunch of Tim Sherwoods.

[Petersa]

As I don't live in the UK I get the overseas TV commentary etc
Match presenters were Joe Spieth (new one on me) and Don Hutchison, both agreed with the red for Cahill and Hutchison was very critical of Chelsea's discipline throughout, thought Luiz should have gone and was scathing of Rudiger's (sp?) dive in the second half.
Studio panel were Phil Neville & Michael Owen who both agreed that Cahill should have gone
Sundays matches had Peter Schmeichel & Tim Sherwood in the studio, Schmeichel said by the book Cahill had to go but should just have been given a talking to - doubt he got that from Sir Alex in his Old Trafford days! Sherwood gave him a glazed look and said nothing. They both sounded Brahms and Lizst by the way, they must give good lunches away!

[Darthlaw]

Almost identical to Hendrick's red versus Watford last season.

If it was a red then, for Hendrick, it's a red now for Cahill.

[Bordeauxclaret]

Definite red. Don't think people would be as lenient if he hadn't played for us previously.

[cricketfieldclarets]

Personally think its the sort of tackle that wouldnt have got a yellow ten years ago. And if Fabregas had gone down like Defour had without being touched we would be raging.

But with the way the game is now you have to accept its a red.

Tacklings gone from the game now.

[piston broke]

Brady was very unprofessional when Luiz put their heads together. It wasn't a butt although even a slight movement backwards by Brady would have left the ref with a decision.
The Marcos tackle was in the second minute and was at least as bad as the Cahill one. Makes you believe they had an agenda.
Fabregas was a clear straight red.

[HiroshimaClaret]

They can gab on all they like, but again, imagine if Barnes had done it as he`s `that kind of player`. It was a red card ALL day. Camera angles make it look slightly less innocuous but they shot where his full boot is running down the length of Defour`s calf tells the story.

[Goodclaret]

I know it's been said by many above but Cahill couldn't be anything other than a red and Fabregas was lucky not to have got a straight red. He goes in dangerously and takes both legs, very lucky we did not pick up a bad injury.

The comparison of reactions says a million things. Cahill is a player who can be respected, Fabregas is a little, whining, petulant tw4t. He fits in very well with their supporters and their, slightly manic, manager. It's a shame he can't be retrospectively banned.

[lucs86]

Same as Hendrick last season. It was more reckless than intentional or truly dangerous. I was pi**ed off when Hendrick was sent so I get why Chelsea are pi**ed off that Cahill was sent, but you get sent off for tackling like that now. Most neutrals seem to see it that way so it's just one to accept.

[mickleoverclaret]

Think everyone in the ground expected a red as soon as it happened. Spoke to loads of Chelsea fans outside after bleating about the ref but didn't meet one person who didn't think Cahill should have gone.

[jtv]

And if Fabregas had gone down like Defour had without being touched we would be raging.

Without being touched? Defour was definitely touched so it was a straight red all along - as was Fabregas' who got away lightly

[alicante claret]

If it was a bad decision why no talk of appeal?

[cricketfieldclarets]

I dont think it was a bad decision. In the current rules its a red. I just dont believe the current rules should be as they are

[Foshiznik]

Cahill was a definite red. He was stretching for an imaginary ball if that was unfortunate. His foot was a long way away from the real life ball.

[Bobzuruncle]

Clearly a red under current rules. It might be harsh but it's the price we have to pay to get a decent level of consistency otherwise we have refs attempting to "manage the occasion" in their own way (as I remember one poster used to say on here). I am sure we will be on the other end it before EoSeason.

[KeighleyClaret]

Intent has nothing to do with it. I would hope that no professional footballer would deliberately go out to injure a fellow professional, if they do they should be thrown out of the game.

Its not Cahill's intention that makes it a red, its the potential for damage to Defour.

I'm sure Defour went down because his leg bl**dy hurt, not to get Cahill sent off.

Correct decision 100%. And credit to Cahill for accepting it without whinging about it.

[levraiclaret]

Just heard Danny Murphy on TalkSport say that "its the Burnley lad's reaction that got Cahill sent off" and Murphy is going to be on the diving review panel. I hope he has a refresher on the laws first.