No there isnt.
We just dont know how to defend
Verstuurd vanaf mijn D5803 met Tapatalk
by Dejan » Wed Feb 03, 2021 6:52 am
by Salibatelli » Wed Feb 03, 2021 7:09 am
by Arsenal Tone » Wed Feb 03, 2021 7:32 am
by theHotHead » Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:23 am
by CrimsonGunner11 » Wed Feb 03, 2021 11:44 pm
by CrimsonGunner11 » Fri Feb 05, 2021 9:37 pm
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:Fwiw the ref and var took about five seconds to review the Luiz incident while they took about five minutes to review a similar incident in the United Soton game. And even with that amount of time they decided to give a penalty and a red card for something I personally would not have given. Quite sure only a few teams would be lucky to get a decision like that and I’m quite sure, more often than not, we wouldn’t be one of them. A little more consistency from the match officials would be nice
by Phil71 » Tue Feb 09, 2021 3:36 pm
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:CrimsonGunner11 wrote:Fwiw the ref and var took about five seconds to review the Luiz incident while they took about five minutes to review a similar incident in the United Soton game. And even with that amount of time they decided to give a penalty and a red card for something I personally would not have given. Quite sure only a few teams would be lucky to get a decision like that and I’m quite sure, more often than not, we wouldn’t be one of them. A little more consistency from the match officials would be nice
Bednarek’s red card overturned. Luiz’s stands.
Would love to hear the reason for this
by VCC » Tue Feb 09, 2021 5:43 pm
by CrimsonGunner11 » Wed Feb 10, 2021 11:26 am
Phil71 wrote:CrimsonGunner11 wrote:CrimsonGunner11 wrote:Fwiw the ref and var took about five seconds to review the Luiz incident while they took about five minutes to review a similar incident in the United Soton game. And even with that amount of time they decided to give a penalty and a red card for something I personally would not have given. Quite sure only a few teams would be lucky to get a decision like that and I’m quite sure, more often than not, we wouldn’t be one of them. A little more consistency from the match officials would be nice
Bednarek’s red card overturned. Luiz’s stands.
Would love to hear the reason for this
Bednarek accidentally clipped Martial when Martial was already falling over.
Luiz accidentally clipped Jose when he was in full flight and bearing down on goal.
There's the difference.
I agree that the Luiz offence deserved a penalty. I disagree with the rule that says it should be accompanied with a red card.
VCC wrote:I dont understand how players that are late and have a niggle from behind get away with it no cards as seen in our last manure match, but you have a player tackle in a 50 50 get the ball totally first and then the player is a free kick and some times booking.
by Salibatelli » Wed Feb 10, 2021 11:39 am
by CrimsonGunner11 » Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:01 pm
Özim wrote:Why would referees be biased against a mid table team? If we were up there challenging or winning you could make a case (although I still don’t think agendas/bias exist in football, it’s just that mistakes are made), but not when you’re in midtable not really challenging for anything.
by theHotHead » Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:49 pm
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:Both cases were accidental.
There was minimal contact in both cases.
Both attacking players were bearing down on goal.
So you’re telling me that just because one case looked more manufactured than the other, it deserves special treatment.
You say martial was already going down before the contact. Well I say he went down after the contact which seems to be the case no matter how many times I look at it.
Who’s to say that Jose didn’t manufacture his foul or who’s to say martial did. Maybe Jose is an expert con artist and martial is a featherweight who falls in an overly dramatic way. Just because someone is a better diver than someone else, it should not mean that we get two different rulings on what looks like a nearly identical incident.
I’ll give another example from the same game as to why I think Luiz’s red card should have been overturned with the Bednarek ruling in mind. Neto later in the game was in our box and was about to get his shot off but was put off because Holding pulled back Neto’s arm. This may have resulted in a goal for them if the pull didn’t occur but the referee and var did not see this as a foul or a booking. We’ve seen many examples like this where contact does not result in a foul. As such, common sense tells me that just because there’s contact in an incident, it does not mean that the incident is a foul. Given this and for the sake of consistency, the final judgment should have been any one of the following:
Bednarek’s red card should have stood,
Luiz’s red card should have been overturned,
Luiz’s foul should not have been given,
or the Neto incident should have at the very least been given as a penalty and Luiz’s red card later overturned.VCC wrote:I dont understand how players that are late and have a niggle from behind get away with it no cards as seen in our last manure match, but you have a player tackle in a 50 50 get the ball totally first and then the player is a free kick and some times booking.
Exactly.
There is a subconscious, or in some cases intentional, bias for and against certain teams imho. That’s the most appropriate way I can explain the inconsistencies we see in these decisions
by CrimsonGunner11 » Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:02 pm
theHotHead wrote:CrimsonGunner11 wrote:Both cases were accidental.
There was minimal contact in both cases.
Both attacking players were bearing down on goal.
So you’re telling me that just because one case looked more manufactured than the other, it deserves special treatment.
You say martial was already going down before the contact. Well I say he went down after the contact which seems to be the case no matter how many times I look at it.
Who’s to say that Jose didn’t manufacture his foul or who’s to say martial did. Maybe Jose is an expert con artist and martial is a featherweight who falls in an overly dramatic way. Just because someone is a better diver than someone else, it should not mean that we get two different rulings on what looks like a nearly identical incident.
I’ll give another example from the same game as to why I think Luiz’s red card should have been overturned with the Bednarek ruling in mind. Neto later in the game was in our box and was about to get his shot off but was put off because Holding pulled back Neto’s arm. This may have resulted in a goal for them if the pull didn’t occur but the referee and var did not see this as a foul or a booking. We’ve seen many examples like this where contact does not result in a foul. As such, common sense tells me that just because there’s contact in an incident, it does not mean that the incident is a foul. Given this and for the sake of consistency, the final judgment should have been any one of the following:
Bednarek’s red card should have stood,
Luiz’s red card should have been overturned,
Luiz’s foul should not have been given,
or the Neto incident should have at the very least been given as a penalty and Luiz’s red card later overturned.VCC wrote:I dont understand how players that are late and have a niggle from behind get away with it no cards as seen in our last manure match, but you have a player tackle in a 50 50 get the ball totally first and then the player is a free kick and some times booking.
Exactly.
There is a subconscious, or in some cases intentional, bias for and against certain teams imho. That’s the most appropriate way I can explain the inconsistencies we see in these decisions
Exactly spot on. People forget that football is a contact sport, not all contact is a foul. Because I touch you in the box unless the touch was sufficient to make you lose your balance or fall its not a foul. 2 players crossing paths is accidental contact, unless there is clear intent from one player to connect with the other player.
by thebigbangtheo » Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:25 pm