A&H

Stoke V Leicester

Was at this game in the away end. As soon as it happened I could see Vardy was pushed quite clearly by Johnson causing him to loose his balance. Mr Pawson has not seen the push and just seen Vardy flying in the air. He thought about what happened midweek. Went straight to his pocket for the red and gave himself no thinking time. Not a red for me but that could be my blue tinted specs. Was a penalty for me thought when I first saw it, Simpsons arm is way too high to be a natural position for me.
 
The Referee Store
Two footed and travelling forward at a force greater than I can pee at..... only one outcome for me.
 
lc21 said:
After being pushed. If it's spotted foul goes the other way.
Click to expand...

A push doesn't launch you through the air feet first towards an opponent........

The "push" had absolutely no bearing on the dangerous challenge.......take the blue spectacles off.
 
Padfoot said:
A push doesn't launch you through the air feet first towards an opponent........

The "push" had absolutely no bearing on the dangerous challenge.......take the blue spectacles off.
Click to expand...

If you look at the challenge, he's not off the floor when he makes contact and studs also aren't showing, he connects with the shins which suggests he's pulling out of the challenge. Watch how much he's put off balance with the tackle. We know how fast Vardy is, a shove will send him in the completely opposite direction. No thinking time from Pawson. It was almost like he couldn't wait to give it.
 
lc21 said:
If you look at the challenge, he's not off the floor when he makes contact and studs also aren't showing, he connects with the shins which suggests he's pulling out of the challenge. Watch how much he's put off balance with the tackle. We know how fast Vardy is, a shove will send him in the completely opposite direction. No thinking time from Pawson. It was almost like he couldn't wait to give it.
Click to expand...
Sigh!
So wrong but we'll see if the power's that be agree with you when they hear the apeal.
 
Suppose we'll see. Just feel Rojo midweek played a huge part in his decision.
 
jofusref said:
havent seen it but if the pundits disagreed, i am sure they were good decisions, tv pundits are clueless when it comes to the laws
Click to expand...
That's often true but not always - and to be fair, while it probably was true in the past, I think they're now trying to improve in this regard. You will actually hear pundits and commentators quote directly from the Laws nowadays and frame their arguments in terms of what it says. As an example, see the discussion on Match of the Day 2 about Man City's second goal against Arsenal. The presenter reads the law out word for word and both pundits (for me) make an accurate analysis based on that wording.

I have to say, while it's still a relative rarity, it makes for a refreshing change when it does happen.
 
Peter Grove said:
That's often true but not always - and to be fair, while it probably was true in the past, I think they're now trying to improve in this regard. You will actually hear pundits and commentators quote directly from the Laws nowadays and frame their arguments in terms of what it says. As an example, see the discussion on Match of the Day 2 about Man City's second goal against Arsenal. The presenter reads the law out word for word and both pundits (for me) make an accurate analysis based on that wording.

I have to say, while it's still a relative rarity, it makes for a refreshing change when it does happen.
Click to expand...

Rather spoilt by the fact they said Man City 1st goal was "clearly" offside - his foot was about 6 inches offside, if that - defender in question is in between AR and Man City player who is a further 50 yards away.

TBF Mark Chapman DID say "Very difficult for official to spot that one", only for pundit to repeat "Yeah, but clearly offside":rolleyes:
 
In fairness, no, but I believe it formed part of the grounds of the appeal.
 
I would of given him the extra game rest for a spurious appeal..... ''but, someone pushed me, ref''.... :p
 
Last edited:
I thought that both decisions were wrong. However the Vardy tackle did look in real time bad, but watching it slow mo he took the ball and did not connect with both feet. Had he been out of control as some have said then he would have connected with both feet. The hand ball, no intent as he was going past the ball.
 
PinnerPaul said:
Rather spoilt by the fact they said Man City 1st goal was "clearly" offside - his foot was about 6 inches offside, if that - defender in question is in between AR and Man City player who is a further 50 yards away.

TBF Mark Chapman DID say "Very difficult for official to spot that one", only for pundit to repeat "Yeah, but clearly offside":rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I'm not sure in what way that reflects on their knowledge of the Laws. The point I was trying to make was that pundits are not always clueless as regards the law and I don't see how correctly calling a very close offside decision invalidates that.

What they were talking about was whether, with the benefit of replays and freeze frame, it was possible to say that the player was offside, not how difficult it can be for the officials to judge offside. They also didn't say that it was clear in real time, only after using the freeze frame - and on the freeze frame, as they correctly stated, the player was clearly in an offside position (even if only marginally so).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top