Match Official Mic'd up

[Paul_10]

Like I said, also the fact the referee has said there may of been some contact and the pictures back up that view means the referee probably did see it in some capacity.

It's just not a howler though and as others have said, it could of gone either way.

On a different note, the red card situation for McGinn seemed a bit of a mess in the VAR room with the VAR unsure whether the referee has produced the red card. The referee did communicate the on field decision but it did not seemed to registered to them what the on field decision was and were waiting for the pictures showing the referee producing the red card. The check seemed to took far longer than it should of.

Also what did people made of the non handball in the West Ham Villa game, the referee said the arms were by his side but they clearly were not as they were outstretched because he was pointing. Surely that is making yourself unnaturally bigger? That would definitely be given in the UEFA competitions I suspect and if the shot was on target then surely West ham gained an unfair advantage there?

 

[OnlyUseMeWhistle]

What's legitimate about playing a ball at chest height with a studs-first jab of the boot with opponents in proximity? And then going on to actually make contact with that opponent, with the studs, twice?

"Stud's first jab" please be serious, he's leading with the toe/laces. This is like say "studs up" slide as if you can slide with the studs on the turf

 

[RefereeX]

Like I said, also the fact the referee has said there may of been some contact and the pictures back up that view means the referee probably did see it in some capacity.

It's just not a howler though and as others have said, it could of gone either way.

On a different note, the red card situation for McGinn seemed a bit of a mess in the VAR room with the VAR unsure whether the referee has produced the red card. The referee did communicate the on field decision but it did not seemed to registered to them what the on field decision was and were waiting for the pictures showing the referee producing the red card. The check seemed to took far longer than it should of.

Also what did people made of the non handball in the West Ham Villa game, the referee said the arms were by his side but they clearly were not as they were outstretched because he was pointing. Surely that is making yourself unnaturally bigger? That would definitely be given in the UEFA competitions I suspect and if the shot was on target then surely West ham gained an unfair advantage there?

John Brooks spoke about this last night at an event I was at. (He gave a very interesting and eye-opening talk about VAR actually, it was fantastic).

The room eventually agreed that him pointing, while not necessarily a natural position for his body, was a natural movement as part of the game, and not a million miles away from a natural position. He then tried to retract it as the cross comes in. Once again, this means it's under the 'not clear and obvious' category.

 

[GraemeS]

Christ people here like getting fixated on exact pieces of terminology. Well, unless that terminology is "careless" I guess...

Fine. What's legitimate about [insert however you would describe doing that at chest height towards an opponent here]?

 

[RefereeX]

Christ people here like getting fixated on exact pieces of terminology. Well, unless that terminology is "careless" I guess...

Fine. What's legitimate about [insert however you would describe doing that at chest height towards an opponent here]?

We're fixated on your description of the incident because it simply wasn't the way you describe it and that's why it isn't clear and obvious.

 

[GraemeS]

**** me! Everyone who knows the definition of careless agrees it's careless. Who gives a **** exactly what words I use to describe an obvious careless foul?

I'm just going to go back to my magic question that no one can answer. Explain to me like I'm 10 why it isn't clear that it meets that definition?

 

[RefereeX]

**** me! Everyone who knows the definition of careless agrees it's careless. Who gives a **** exactly what words I use to describe an obvious careless foul?

I'm just going to go back to my magic question that no one can answer. Explain to me like I'm 10 why it isn't clear that it meets that definition?

We give a *** what words you use because it backs up the argument that you're struggling to see beyond your bias when you describe it in a way far worse than it was.

I mean we've already said it but you won't accept it... because football isn't all about the black and white bits written in law or we could have 50 penalties a game.

 

[GraemeS]

So vibes then...

 

[george.g]

I mean we've already said it but you won't accept it... because football isn't all about the black and white bits written in law or we could have 50 penalties a game.

For what it’s worth - if we gave everything that could be careless in the PA, we would be giving a fair few penalties! That threshold does change, undoubtedly.

 

[JamesL]

What's legitimate about playing a ball at chest height with a studs-first jab of the boot with opponents in proximity? And then going on to actually make contact with that opponent, with the studs, twice?

When he started the action, I don't think there was a player in proximity close enough that to start to attempt that action would be showing a lack of attention or acting without precaution so he was making a legitimate attempt to play the ball.
In doing so he has ended up showing a lack of attention to the fact McAllister was about to move into that same area.

**** me! Everyone who knows the definition of careless agrees it's careless. Who gives a **** exactly what words I use to describe an obvious careless foul?

I'm just going to go back to my magic question that no one can answer. Explain to me like I'm 10 why it isn't clear that it meets that definition?

I think my view and I touched upon it was is that I agree Doku is likely guilty of having showed a lack of attention. BUT similarly some could argue that McAllister is guilty of acting without precaution for the reasons I have already talked about.

 

[Kinsleyr]

When he started the action, I don't think there was a player in proximity close enough that to start to attempt that action would be showing a lack of attention or acting without precaution so he was making a legitimate attempt to play the ball.
In doing so he has ended up showing a lack of attention to the fact McAllister was about to move into that same area.

I think my view and I touched upon it was is that I agree Doku is likely guilty of having showed a lack of attention. BUT similarly some could argue that McAllister is guilty of acting without precaution for the reasons I have already talked about.

Of course running in to challenge for the ball and then seeing that the opposing player is raising his foot up to chest height and not having the good grace to stop and let Doku clear the ball is obvously acting without precaution and is almost a foul in itself.

It seems to me and this isn't just about Liverpool that some referees can only back up what is said by those referees in VAR and also on the pitch to say that they obviously get 99% of all calls correct.

I'm also sure none of us has ever got a decision wrong or rarely ever so yes lets just agree that we can't discuss the rules and how they are implemented by Oliver etc as he is almost above the law when it comes to making decisions (and I believe he's the best England have got but he's been let down by his VAR).

 

[JamesL]

Of course running in to challenge for the ball and then seeing that the opposing player is raising his foot up to chest height and not having the good grace to stop and let Doku clear the ball is obvously acting without precaution and is almost a foul in itself.

No need for the sarcasm, really!
Of course it can be. If you see danger and proceed into that danger that is then very definition of acting without precaution.

You can just as easily flip your sentence around to a man city point of view hence the lack of clear and obvious for intervention.

It seems to me and this isn't just about Liverpool that some referees can only back up what is said by those referees in VAR and also on the pitch to say that they obviously get 99% of all calls correct.

It seems to me some people dont really understand how VAR works.

I'm also sure none of us has ever got a decision wrong or rarely ever so yes lets just agree that we can't discuss the rules and how they are implemented by Oliver etc as he is almost above the law when it comes to making decisions (and I believe he's the best England have got but he's been let down by his VAR).

He's been let down by his VAR?
Despite his boss backing up the VAR not intervening. And the independent panel also doing so... Ok

Plenty of Liverpool fan forums for you to hang around on buddy...

 

[CaptainsPlease]

This is the frame Doku starts to lift his foot. Mac Allister is already in close proximity and the contact is about a quarter of a second later, virtually impossible to anticipate and avoid. There was only one player here who could be reasonably said to have lacked attention or consideration in this challenge.

 

[es1]

On a different note, the red card situation for McGinn seemed a bit of a mess in the VAR room with the VAR unsure whether the referee has produced the red card. The referee did communicate the on field decision but it did not seemed to registered to them what the on field decision was and were waiting for the pictures showing the referee producing the red card. The check seemed to took far longer than it should of.

i thought it was perfect tbh. it took a long time to show the red card on the field due to the melee. once it was shown the VAR communicated check complete almost instantly.

RE doku (and a separate discussion) - i still cant see how this is anything other than a clear foul

 

[RefereeX]

This is the frame Doku starts to lift his foot. Mac Allister is already in close proximity and the contact is about a quarter of a second later, virtually impossible to anticipate and avoid. There was only one player here who could be reasonably said to have lacked attention or consideration in this challenge.
View attachment 7227

Doku has already began moving his foot here and MacAllister has 2 feet on the ground. He then proceeds to jump and turn at the same time in Doku's direction. He's no more in control of his movements than Doku, arguably less so.

 

[GraemeS]

The independent panel doesn't consist only of referees. If the suggestion is that football doesn't expect a penalty here, that's a problem with the laws that clearly dictate it should be a penalty. And that needs to be either fixed by IFAB or expectations changed by consistent application of this being given until football starts to expect the foul to be given.

What it doesn't need is isolated VARs choosing not to apply the law at random or because it's a big scary decision or because MO's word is gospel.

 

[CaptainsPlease]

Doku has already began moving his foot here and MacAllister has 2 feet on the ground. He then proceeds to jump and turn at the same time in Doku's direction. He's no more in control of his movements than Doku, arguably less so.

Putting a boot up at that proximity (~2 yards?) with the opponent closing in is always likely to result in a PIADM offence when no contact or a direct free kick/penalty kick in the event of contact.

 

[JamesL]

We have two players running into the same space... We have one who wants to play the ball with his foot (surprise surprise in a game of FOOTball!)
Another one who knows and can see his opponent is going to do that and continues to jump and turn into that anyway.

Who has the right of way here?

If either pull out of their actions the other could be guilty of PIADM.

If Doku plays the ball first and McAllister hits his leg after then he's committed a foul and what happens is the opposite, McAllister plays the ball a nano second earlier, and then there is some contact, which doesn't appear to have a great deal of force but I accept it meets the criteria for a careless foul.

It's such a marginal decision, 49/51, I cant see why anyone is expecting VAR to re referee it. It is not an egregious error (unless you are a Liverpool fan).

 

[Paul_10]

John Brooks spoke about this last night at an event I was at. (He gave a very interesting and eye-opening talk about VAR actually, it was fantastic).

The room eventually agreed that him pointing, while not necessarily a natural position for his body, was a natural movement as part of the game, and not a million miles away from a natural position. He then tried to retract it as the cross comes in. Once again, this means it's under the 'not clear and obvious' category.

All well and good that maybe common sense comes into it but we all know common sense does not apply to the laws and the fact pointing may be a natural position as part of the game is no doubt not covered in the laws otherwise defenders can now justify there arms being away from their body just because they are pointing to a team mate.

Having looked at it again, it does not appear to be a shot at goal and close proximately could be a factor but the referee says the arm is by his side but replays don't show that so could be an potential error by the referee? Also that arm being outstretched stops the ball potentially landing to another Aston Villa player.

It would almost certain be given in UEFA competitions and most likely to be given in most European leagues aswell and I don't think there would be too many complaints about it.

 

[RefereeX]

All well and good that maybe common sense comes into it but we all know common sense does not apply to the laws and the fact pointing may be a natural position as part of the game is no doubt not covered in the laws otherwise defenders can now justify there arms being away from their body just because they are pointing to a team mate.

Having looked at it again, it does not appear to be a shot at goal and close proximately could be a factor but the referee says the arm is by his side but replays don't show that so could be an potential error by the referee? Also that arm being outstretched stops the ball potentially landing to another Aston Villa player.

It would almost certain be given in UEFA competitions and most likely to be given in most European leagues aswell and I don't think there would be too many complaints about it.

You're right, it probably would be given in Europe, but we have different expectations of handball (rightly or wrongly) here.

I think it's another one like the much discussed Liverpool one. Could be an error, but certainly not clear and obvious. His arm is still pointed downwards, not right out. I don't think all of football in this country expects that to be a penalty for handball.