frederikos.nikolis

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@theawayfans The other teams. Weakest goalkeeper of the favourites

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@EliotShorrParks Can’t think of one US player that would make Belgium’s bench, let alone France’s, Spain’s …

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@AndyHermanNFL Football rule : you’re only as good as your opponent lets you.

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@RBPundit But yes it was a justified red, even FIFA agreed

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@cenkuygur FIFA also said that an appeal would automatically be rejected- no due process. FIFA’s rules also didn’t allow an appeal from US Soccer (read their post game statement)

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@cenkuygur Your missing the point don’t you. This is ruling as it goes. FIFA’s Article 66.4 clearly states that a direct red card results in an automatic suspension for at least 1 game. This ruling sets a precedent for future disciplinary sanctions.

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@RichardMotzkin @ussoccer Fifa’s disciplinary code does not permit appeals against straight red cards, with officials from the world governing body and US Soccer confirming after the game that the sanction could not be challenged.

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@camolNFT Euh that decision was also widely criticised

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@DavidPeterJ @AlZeidenfeld @NCHammer1980 He can’t, there are more than 3 sentences. He needs a hydration break

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@jimgeraghty This is 100% red in almost all football nations. Open foot on Achilles of opponent, intentional or not, is putting in danger the physical integrity of the player. + FIFA agrees since they gave him a probation. Under fifa rules red card = at least suspended for 1 game Article 66.4

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@ellencarmichael The review committee gave a probation. They didn’t revoke the red card. Probation means the penalty and the suspension was correct! FIFA announced before the WC and before every game that a red card = at least 1 game suspension the NEXT game - Article 66.4. Rules as they go along

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@jasonrmcintyre VAR can not give a sanction. And VAR was introduced in 2018 - so 30 years would be a bit difficult

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@FOXSports #ThierryHenry should know the “purpose” has nothing to do with the fact a player is sanctioned or not. Most fouls are unintentional. @FOXSports. Rule stipulates the endangerment of physical integrity of a player or official.

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@MacAlgoTrader Paraguay was missing Julio Enciso. So why did USA play them?

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@CoachBeaumont A suspension can be lifted yes. 1st there needs to be an appeal- there wasn’t.
A committee has to hear both sides argument (referee department and plaintiff) - there wasn’t

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@DavidFurones_ @Jamison598294 So if a star player or is injured for a couple of months we should we a couple of months to play a game. Got it

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@brianlilley @Linklicks Intent has nothing to do with a foul or not. An open foot on the Achilles or ankle of the opononent endangers “The Physical Integrity” - thus a red card.

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@SamENole It was an is, that’s what FIFA says. But it’s with probation

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@JonnyRoot_ But the red card and the suspension still stands! It’s with probation. Basically FIFA is saying yes the red card is justified and the subsequent suspension is complying with the rules. Next time he does it again, he will be suspended

[frederikos.nikolis @nikolisf]

@SlowToWrite The red card wasn’t overturned, the suspension is now a probation. Meaning the red card was justified as is the consequence: 1 match suspension