Dortmund vs Ajax
- Thread starter bester
- Start date
one
RefChat Addict
Disagree. Glad you used the word 'likely' there. Because this is one of those which it is not. Attempting to use excessive force, or 'possibility' to endanger safety are not red cards. This looks bad but it is not a red card (just like the red card in Liv vs Ath). This fits the definition of reckless much closer than UEF.
And the Twitter post saying "VAR confirmed a red card" is nonsense. VAR confirmed red card is not clearly and obviously wrong . Two different things.
Anubis
RefChat Addict
the defender at no point makes contact with the ball with either leg, the first contact the ball has with the defender is when it rolls off his back, after he has crashed into the attacker
defender also airbourne, both feet off ground (13.9-15 secs on clip)
this red deserves praise not ridicule, neither of the defenders feet go near the ball
defender also airbourne, both feet off ground (13.9-15 secs on clip)
this red deserves praise not ridicule, neither of the defenders feet go near the ball
Nah, can't come close to agreeing with you
It's not dangerous, its not high, it doesn't endanger his safety
Sure it's a foul but a red, cannot agree
deusex
RefChat Addict
Can we stop with this "two feet off the ground" nonsense. The defender is clearly trying to block the ball and his direction of travel is in front of the player not into the player. His feet land on the ground about 4 hours before any contact is made.
The fans/players/pundits/most refs don't want a red card here but some have managed to see one.
I know it's Oliver and he's the Messiah
The fans/players/pundits/most refs don't want a red card here but some have managed to see one.
I know it's Oliver and he's the Messiah
No disagreement but that doesn't equal a red
Anubis
RefChat Addict
its long been lectured that one of the key elements for sfp is leaving the ground with both feet
Soon as that happens, an elite referee will be thinking red....
its long established as one of the criteria
Fine, you can think red, but it's not automatic. Other factors have to be considered to make it a red.
Anubis
RefChat Addict
So the defender has lunged in, fact
both feet off ground ( airbourne), which takes you into the out of control catergory, fact
made no contact with the ball with either foot, only the oppoinent, fact
how can it not be endangering the safety?
" ref, i know i wiped out the striker using my entire body, but, in my defence, my back made a clean tackle"
By that logic, the Ajax player needs red also then? He leaves the ground with both feet and actually stands on Hummels leg.
No way this is a red imo
I don't think he does endanger his safety any more than a standard slide tackle which trips a player up.
He slides well in front of the player to block the ball. It's absolutely not a clean tackle but there was zero risk of serious injury to the ajax player
one
RefChat Addict
Will you send a defender off if he did this 10 yards away from opponent. If not why not? It satisfy all your criteria. There is more to it that just airbourne, touching the ball, lunge.
He has sufficient distance to not make front on contact. This simple fact nullifies many of your considerations.
Anubis
RefChat Addict
And when you leave the ground, with both feet off the ground, you are now out of control.....
and when you are out of control, of course you are endangering your opponents safety,
def a challenge an elite ref will go red for whilst one who has not been privy to ( how to put in non offending terms), ' superior' directives, will not see a red
I think they can be mutually exclusive and this is a challenge that falls into that category