Aden Baldwin unsuccessful appeal

In the Spurs Atletico game VAR has deemed Van Der Vens tackle not worthy of a red yet it was worse than Baldwins.

 

They got away lightly Steve on 4 minutes it shows his raise foot which normally would have been a yellow but for some reason the referee preferred a chat, Wellen's was well aware of the situation and hooked him less that a minute later.

 

Metcalfe knows how dangerous the tackle was, you can see it in the reaction.

 

Koroma's should have been a straight red, no doubt. He's not attempted to play the ball. It's either a calculated, nasty challenge or he's reckless and therefore out of control.

 

The written reasons for the appeal being rejected have been published. It was a unanimous decision by the panel of 3 (all ex players) for both the red card and excessive punishment.

The main part of why it was rejected is below. Whether people agree with the laws or not it was the right decision and I was never going to be overturned.



https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2025-26/claim-of-wrongful-dismissal-and-clearly-excessive---aden-baldwin---9-march-2026.ashx

 

If both players were entering a robust attempt to get the ball with BOTH feet off the ground was it only because the little whimp wriggled like he had been shot , that he wasn’t sent off as well?

 

Yes both players had left the ground,our player got to the ball first, but he couldn’t unscrew his bent trailing leg in time to prevent the contact
It’s bollocks and we all know it
Any retrospective view of Koroma that day, would see him getting a ban, but mr weak as piss referee game them the opportunity to take him off rather than send him off
We we’re not subject to the same

 

I think they are basically just saying that it's not a clear and obvious error by the referee so they've upheld it which is fair enough.

I never thought it was a red but neither did I think it would be overturned. It was one of those that some refs give and some don't even give the foul and as football fans I suppose you just have to accept the frustration.

 

So as usual, no consistency from officials
Which is all fans ask for
There is too much of a grey area
The so called concussion from Tuesday another example
If he is injured, he’s injured and should not matter what or how that injury occurs
What happens if you don’t have enough subs to fill your bench that game .the then extra allowance for you is irrelevant

 

I'm not sure what your point is Andy. Clough has already said that the lad won't be allowed to play Saturday so by bending the rules on Tuesday they now miss him for a full 90 minutes at least.

With the concussion protocol it's not for a 4th official or referee to judge if there's a risk or not, they just follow the guidance given.

 

I didn’t see any concussions test on the player
It was right in front of me in the kop
He initially held his leg
Maybe his brains are in his big toe
I just think the rules are too open for interpretation
And lots of clubs push them, when it should be back and white

 

He got the knock on his head in the first half,and to be fair,the physio went through the tests,even holding his fingers up in front of the player.However,he must have deemed him fit to carry on.

 

So delayed concussion, but having played on for quite a while . The substitute rule should not have been allowed
They should have played on with 10 men
As I said, too many grey areas that club are using to bend the rules and I am not excusing City from this, we have often used the injured goalkeeper to stop play so the manager can get a message to the players etc

 

There was one earlier this week , maybe Tottenham , absolutely identical in every way . It was a yellow . If only we had consistency …that’s what riles up fans the most . Some will say it’s never black and white but hey …. I knew for certain it wouldn’t be overturned. Odd they didn’t indicate the refs view was from the rear thus he must have guessed what the contact was? . Oh well

 

And one assumes they conducted the same test at half time before allowing him to carry on for a further 33 minutes ? He was subbed within TWELVE mins of the game ending. I’m smelling rule manipulation . Let’s see if Bowery does play Sat?

 

They didn't say both players have both feet off the ground, they have said Baldwin had both feet off the ground. The Leyton Orient player never left the floor with both feet. They've not commented on the Leyton Orient player, it is all about Baldwin.

It was never going to be overturned as it ticked all of the boxes for serious foul play.

 

Possibly but again, the referee and other officials aren't medical professionals so if they are being told that it's concussion then they're pretty much obliged to take that at face value.

 

Clough has already said that he won't be available. For me that's the end of the matter.

 

Photos posted on here show otherwise however agree , I missed the apostrophe . Players / player’s . Tnx for clarity .