No he doesn't, he pretty much flicks him with his toe with very little force and Mac Allister goes down like he has been shot. And I can say that as someone with absolutely no skin in the game as I don't support either team.
Liv City - Klopp and Pep for maybe the last time
- Thread starter santa sangria
- Start date
- Status
But subjectivity is something I'd naturally associate with feelings, and subjectivity is also something I'd naturally associate with the C&O threshold. That's how I'm drawing the dots together.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a foul, but if that is missed in the middle of the pitch, it doesn't garner this attention because it's not that blatant of an error.
My thoughts exactly. I'm a league one supporter at the minute and what happens in the premier league has very, very little impact on my life.
Yes, he catches the thigh on the way down, but MacAllister has also spun around and jumped towards doku, not fully in control of his own movements.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
I just hope any referee reading this - who is not Oliver or Atwell - realises this has to be a foul and penalty at grassroots and lower leagues.
1. It was a busy day for Mac Allister. He was possibly fouled before Manchester City's goal, or possibly not depending on which team you support.BTW, this thread has too many summaries. Can someone summarise the summaries for me
2. He was also fouled in the Manchester City penalty area towards the end of the game according to the general consensus on here.
3. However, there is general disagreement as to whether the decision not to award a penalty kick was a clear and obvious error.
4. @GraemeS seems to be pretty sure that he is correct and everybody else is wrong.
5. Also, the Princess of Wales is missing.
one
RefChat Addict
I just hope they know it's a foul in ANY league.
I think pretty much every referee thinks it's a foul however the general disagreement is on if it is a C&O error not to give it.
This has to be a textbook C&O error for a foul in the penalty area not being given.
What exactly is the argument for it not being a foul? Mac Allister initiating the contact? No, Doku's boot starts to come up maybe a quarter of a second before the contact there is no way for Mac Allister to anticipate it.
It would be a very small minority of refs indeed who would argue this is not a foul. I would be giving a caution for that.
If these are not to be recommended for on-field review, then time to stop the pretence and scrap VAR altogether for subjective decisions.
What exactly is the argument for it not being a foul? Mac Allister initiating the contact? No, Doku's boot starts to come up maybe a quarter of a second before the contact there is no way for Mac Allister to anticipate it.
It would be a very small minority of refs indeed who would argue this is not a foul. I would be giving a caution for that.
If these are not to be recommended for on-field review, then time to stop the pretence and scrap VAR altogether for subjective decisions.
I don’t think the argument that myself and a couple of others are making is whether it’s careless. We all personally agree it is. However I think there’s been enough subjectivity displayed by a range of stakeholders in the game as to whether this is C&O. I mean we’re still
debating it now. To me - Atwell shouldn’t have intervened
debating it now. To me - Atwell shouldn’t have intervened
Everyone else? Go back to the first page and you'll see a fairly clear consensus - a couple of dissenting voices at the time but who now actually do all agree it was a foul. And the vast majority astonished VAR hasn't intervened, including 9 likes on my original post suggesting it's a really obvious decision.
It only feels like a "balanced" discussion because "yes" "no" "yes" "no" "yes" "no" "yes" "no" takes up much more space than a bunch of people all agreeing and then stopping talking about it. And those 2 or 3 people have a particular definition of C&O that doesn't include making a decision when a wide majority of referees see a missed foul. For no reason that I can discern, a clear missed foul that could easily decide the title this season isn't C&O.....?
Why? You're all just talking in such nebulous terms, the idea that it doesn't "feel" like VAR should do anything. What isn't clear or obvious about it being a foul?
Do you not think it's worth taking in to account the feelings of all football stakeholders in to account when deciding what we define as clear and obvious?
Do you mind me asking whether you may be a fan of Liverpool? (whether you deem that to be relevant or not)
I didn't think I was being particularly unsubtle about that. But I'm trying to look at this with my referee hat on as well and by reference to the laws, and I'm just not seeing an answer other than "vibes" to explain why this isn't C&O?
Please forgive my nebulous terms.
There are in my opinion, enough stakeholders who do not believe that the player has showed a lack of consideration/attention when challenging, nor do they believe Doku acted without precaution.
Now I’ve been explicit, I think it’s a foul, and therefore a penalty.
However I believe there are enough stakeholders (many of whom couldn’t define ‘careless’ but could probably tell you what a foul is the majority of the time!) who don’t believe that this is careless. For me, that is too subjective to be Clear & Obvious. We’ve spoken at length on this forum about how VAR should be intervening when 9/10 or 10/10 people think it’s wrong. I’d argue that figure is realistically 7-8.
There are in my opinion, enough stakeholders who do not believe that the player has showed a lack of consideration/attention when challenging, nor do they believe Doku acted without precaution.
Now I’ve been explicit, I think it’s a foul, and therefore a penalty.
However I believe there are enough stakeholders (many of whom couldn’t define ‘careless’ but could probably tell you what a foul is the majority of the time!) who don’t believe that this is careless. For me, that is too subjective to be Clear & Obvious. We’ve spoken at length on this forum about how VAR should be intervening when 9/10 or 10/10 people think it’s wrong. I’d argue that figure is realistically 7-8.
I can forgive the nebulous terms, but that doesn't mean I have to accept them!
The fact is, I don't really know what any of that means. If stakeholders can't define "careless", I don't really see why their opinion matters? VAR is a referee and law-based system - if we want to go back to refereeing based on vibes as was the case 100 years ago we can, but it would require major surgery to the law book to rip most of it out.
A referee in the VAR booth should be looking at the incident, recalling their understanding of law and deciding "Is that obviously at least a careless foul in the PA?". And if the answer is yes (which I now think almost every referee on this thread thinks it is), they should be doing their job and getting involved to make the big call they're employed to make.
Okay I can take that point on.I can forgive the nebulous terms, but that doesn't mean I have to accept them!
The fact is, I don't really know what any of that means. If stakeholders can't define "careless", I don't really see why their opinion matters? VAR is a referee and law-based system - if we want to go back to refereeing based on vibes as was the case 100 years ago we can, but it would require major surgery to the law book to rip most of it out.
A referee in the VAR booth should be looking at the incident, recalling their understanding of law and deciding "Is that obviously at least a careless foul in the PA?". And if the answer is yes (which I now think almost every referee on this thread thinks it is), they should be doing their job and getting involved to make the big call they're employed to make.
I still don’t think it’s bang on C&O, but I understand your point and I’m willing to say it makes sense. I will obviously stand by the fact that views of stakeholders, whether completely justifiable in law or not, are relevant here. But at the same time, I get where you’re coming from.
Will call it there on my end and simply agree with the merit of your argument, and agree to disagree
- Status