Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
He, incorrectly either thought ake was covering (he wasnt) or that the direction was wider than it really was.
Agree, I think he thought that Ake was round on the cover and I've put in my other reply why I think that was.
Yeah, but we know from multiple previous experiences what managers say the referee said isn't necessarily what they said. I like Keith Andrews, I've refereed him and had a lengthy chat with him at a football event, but I find it very hard to believe that a FIFA referee has told him that it wasn't DOGSO because a foul close to the edge of the penalty area was too far from goal. That just makes zero sense.
Im not saying its truth. Just saying what he has claimed.
And I agree with you that Sam will be disappointed once he sees what happened etc. And I agree with Rusty Ref that it was probably his positioning that caused him to administer only a yellow, as well as the advice to remedy. If only a delegate rather than an Observer in this competition then I suspect that from his/her viewing of the footage will say exactly what Rusty Ref has said. My point is that I think that we as a group are quite quick to criticise decisions of a Referee which is easy to do from an armchair looking at clips in slow motion, real time & more than once. But a Referee and any Observer at the game without VAR only have one look/bite of the cherry. So have to be 100% sure what they have seen.
The problem is managers are interviewed as soon as the game ends and their emotions are too high. I managed at a decent level, obviously nowhere near the level we are talking here, but I dread to think what I might have said if someone had stuck a microphone in my face as soon as a game ended. I was fuming after plenty of games but had usually calmed down and looked at it a lot more rationally within a few hours.
The interview i have seen looks like its in the press room, video supplied by Niche Sport Media.
I sort of disagree with this for the context. I agree looking down the barrel is not a good position for foul recognition. But once you have recognised the foul, that is actually not a bad position to judge DOGSO considerations.It should have been DOGSO, but I think Sam Barrott found it difficult based on his position. This is the time of the foul ...
Nathan Ake is between him and the offence, and I suspect from the flat viewing angle he has he thinks that Ake is much closer to play than he actually was. A referee never wants to be looking straight down the barrel and that's exactly what he had here, the development advice from me would be to have created an angle. There's an argument to say that the AR should have helped, but we don't know what was said over comms.
I can hear it in my ears about SFP calls and going safe from Messrs Hackett & (from this forum) Runner Ref, though we don’t seem to hear from the latter these days. I’m sure he would be livid with some of the things I’ve said. My view is that those top Referees who never had VAR, they will have the confidence to make brave decisions, especially when they didn’t have social media & 30-60 cameras at their games. These days it’s a different world that many can’t relate to where safe is probably the right word to use, though Referees like Oliver & Taylor are probably braver/stronger than most. I’ve digressed from the non DOGSO incident with the City game, so just to say that it’s clear from everybody else’s comments that they consider it should have been a DOGSO & probably Sam does too by now.
I think what happens is the bit we are all subsceptible too which is we take the picture at the wrong time.
You have said in one paragraph what I was thinking last night in several & even then ….!!
I agree with the sentiment.
Absolutely this. There is a reason behind every mistake, looking for those reasons isn’t trying to say that a mistake hasn’t been made, rather to try and understand why. That reason might be something as basic as the referee switching off, but that is still a reason.
